Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S.
Roshnara – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Chief Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. questions on evidence reliance and suppression. (Para 3) |
| 2. facts of property ownership and resurvey discrepancies. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's observations on trial court's findings. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT :
Easwaran S., J.
Admit.
2. Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.
3. After hearing Shri.R.S.Kalkura, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Shri.K.Denny Devassy, the learned Senior Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, this Court is of the view that on a short point this appeal could be disposed of and the following substantial questions of law are framed for consideration:-
(i) Is it not that the Courts below ought not have relied on the Commission Report as the same contains serious mistakes impinging upon the description of the plaint schedule properties
(ii) Is it not that the suppression of the original survey plan by the respondents which is in their custody ought to have been seriously viewed by the courts below and should not have the courts below taken an adverse inference?
(iii) Should not have the courts below directed the plaint schedule property be measured, identified and located as per the title deeds whi
The court emphasized the necessity of evaluating a Commissioner's report and related evidence before drawing legal conclusions on property title disputes.
A court cannot entertain a second appeal under Section 100 CPC unless a substantial question of law is raised, reaffirming that lower courts’ evidence assessments cannot be re-evaluated absent new co....
The right and title to property have to be determined not with reference to survey demarcation but based on other cogent materials, primary of which is title deed. The record of survey result shall b....
Plaintiffs' right to assert title over property is constrained by prior re-survey designating part as puramboke; appeal dismissed for lack of substantial legal question.
The court affirmed that a Commissioner's report, once accepted and unchallenged, is valid evidence in property disputes, emphasizing the importance of timely objections.
A suit cannot be dismissed for lack of pleadings if supported by documents; the advocate commissioner's report is valid evidence unless challenged.
The acceptability of evidence, the burden of proof, and the requirement for positive evidence to support a claim were central legal principles established in the judgment.
Revenue records do not confer title; boundaries can be established through man-made markers, and the inclusion of property in resurvey does not alter ownership.
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
