Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Kunjamma Cherian(Deid), W/O. K.C.Cherian – Appellant
Versus
Elizabeth Thomas, W/O. P.M.Thomas – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on property rights and disputes. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the validity of claims. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court observations on admissibility and prior rights. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. determining rights and obligations under the sale deeds. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. court's final ruling and implications. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna S., J.
This Regular First Appeal is filed by defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.45 of 2014 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Thiruvalla, challenging the decree and judgment dated 21.12.2018 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge in that suit.
2. The basic facts necessary for deciding this first appeal are as follows:
The 3rd defendant is a company engaged in the business of the construction of apartments. 4th defendant is the Managing Director of the 3rd defendant company. Item No.1 of the plaint schedule property belonged to the 3rd defendant company. Defendants 1 and 2 purchased fractional right over item No.1 of the plaint schedule property and the right to construct the flat in the said property by virtue of Ext.A2 sale deed bearing No.1546/2004 of S.R.O. Thiruvalla dated 25.05.2004. Later, defendants 3 and 4 sol
The appellate court must deny new evidence unless specific procedural conditions are met, ensuring fair consideration based only on original trial submissions.
Suit for declaration and for recovery of possession or for recovery of possession alone is maintainable within 12 years from the date, when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plai....
The court emphasized the necessity of procedural fairness in appellate proceedings, ruling that irregularities void a judgment and necessitate remand for retrial without merits adjudication.
A transaction can be deemed a sham if the evidence shows it was never intended to create actual legal rights, emphasizing the principle that oral evidence is admissible to dispute the nature of writt....
Point of law : non-delivery of possession by the plaintiff to the defendant does not by itself or other facts cumulatively pointed out by the plaintiff, would lead to the conclusion that the transact....
Suit for declaration and recovery of possession - Decreed - Suit for declaration and recovery of possession on strength of title is maintainable, still it is duty of court to peruse evidence regardin....
The validity and consequences of a sale deed, including the transfer of title and possession, must be raised and challenged within the statutory time limit to be considered valid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering material aspects and appreciating the findings of the trial court in property dispute cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that sale deeds executed in violation of an injunction order are void, and the doctrine of lis pendens applies to such transactions.
Appellate court cannot admit additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC absent due diligence proof or necessity for judgment; must record reasons; erroneous allowance despite negligence and delay....
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
