A.HARIPRASAD
V. K. Kannadasan S/o. Karuppaswami – Appellant
Versus
Radhakrishnan S/o. Velappan – Respondent
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and contesting respondents.
2. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition filed by the 1st respondent against the appellant, his mother and brother. Property originally belonged to one Karuppaswami. Defendants 1 to 3 are his wife and children. One Kochumol filed O.S.No.485 of 2003 before the Court of Munsiff, Ottappalam against the appellant (1st defendant) and obtained a decree for money. The suit was decreed ex-parte against the appellant. The ex-parte decree was executed through E.P. No.90 of 2006 by sale of 1/3 share of the 1st defendant (appellant) in the plaint schedule property. The property was put in auction and it was purchased by the 1st respondent herein. The sale was confirmed in his name. The property was symbolically delivered to him. Thereafter, 1st the respondent/plaintiff demanded partition, which was refused by the defendants.
3. The suit was decreed by the trial court finding that the 1st respondent is entitled to 1/3 share of the property by virtue of the court sale in O.S.No.485 of 2003. It goes without saying that 1/3 share belonged to the appellant was obtained by the 1st respondent in the court sale. O
Desh Bandhu Guptha v. N.L. Anand & Rajinder Singh
Mahakal Automobiles v. Kishan Swaroop Sharma
Lagan Jute Machineries Co. Ltd. v. Candlewoood Holdings Ltd.
India Cements Capital Limited v. William & Others
Brahmdeo Chaudhary v. Rishikesh Prasad Jaiswal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.