SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

N.ANIL KUMAR
P. M. Aravindan – Appellant
Versus
K. P. Udayakumar – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Sri. V.V. Surendran and Sri. P.A. Harish, Advocates
For the Respondent:Sri. S.K. Adhithyan and Smt. Keerthi S. Jyothi, Advocates

JUDGMENT

N. Anil Kumar, J.—This R.S.A. is directed against the judgment and decree in A.S.No.53 of 2016 dated 05.12.2016 on the file of the first Additional District Court, Kozhikode, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the first appellate court’) confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.314/2013 dated 23.12.2015 on the file of the Principal Munsiff’s Court-II, Kozhikode (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial court’). The defendant, who was directed to vacate the plaint schedule property by way of a decree for mandatory injunction, was before the first appellate court. The plaintiff before the trial court, who was the respondent before the first appellate court, is the respondent herein. The parties are hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff and defendant according to their status in the trial court unless otherwise stated.

2. The plaintiff claims that the plaint schedule property originally belonged to one Choyi @ Damodaran (hereinafter referred to as ‘Choyi’) from whom he acquired the property as per assignment deed registered as document No.4017/2012 of Chevayur Sub Registry dated 10.12.2012. The defendant was a licensee under Choyi as per agreement dated 30.5.2012, for a monthly

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top