Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
N.C.Kaladharan, S/o. N.Chellappan – Appellant
Versus
Kamaleswaran Chellappan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. partition claim based on properties inherited from parents. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. contestations regarding the validity of the will. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. judgment on the credibility of the evidence presented. (Para 17 , 23) |
| 4. burden of proof of execution lies with the propounder. (Para 36 , 56) |
| 5. recognition of intestacy and instruction for partition of properties. (Para 81) |
JUDGMENT :
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J.
1. The Appellant is the Defendant No.5 in the suit. The Respondent No.1 is the Original Plaintiff, the Respondent No.2 is the Defendant No.1, who was later transposed as the Additional Plaintiff No.2. The Respondents 3 to 5 are the Defendant Nos.2 to 4.
2. During the pendency of this Appeal, the Respondent No.3 died and his legal heirs were impleaded as Additional Respondent Nos.6, 7 & 8.
3. The original Plaintiff filed the suit for partition of plaint A, B & C schedule properties on the allegation that the said properties belonged to the mother of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, Smt. Gouri Ponnamma, who died on 01.11.1994.
4. Plaint A schedule property contains two items of immovable properties. Item No.1 is 35‰ cents of land in Sy.No.952/2 & 953 of Vanchiyoo
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
