Sivanandan through Legal Heirs VS Ani

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

EASWARAN S.
Sivanandan through Legal Heirs – Appellant
Versus
Ani – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:A2 - Sri. K. Rajesh Kannan, Sri. A.S. Shammy Raj and Sri. P. Shanes Methar, Advocates & A2 to A5 - Sri. G.S. Reghunath, Advocate
For the Respondents:Sri. B. Krishna Mani, Advocate

JUDGMENT

These appeals arise out of the common judgment and decree passed by the II Addl. Munsiff’s Court, Neyyattinkara, in OS Nos.216/2004 and 441/2004 dated 13.10.2006 and also a counterclaim for partition. OS No.216/2004 is a suit for injunction, whereas OS No.441/2004 is a suit for redemption of mortgage and partition.

2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeals are as follows:-

OS No.441 of 2004 is instituted by Vimala Bai and Ayyappan Sivanandan seeking for redemption of mortgage. OS No.216 of 2004 is instituted by one Ani, the sibling of Vimala Bai, seeking for a decree of injunction restraining his sister from trespassing into the plaint schedule property. For consideration of the issues raised in these appeals, it will suffice the cause if the facts leading to the filing of OS No.441 of 2004 are stated. The plaint A schedule property belonged to the 2nd plaintiff’s father, late Sadasivan, as per document No.425 of 1961. Late Sadasivan mortgaged the property in favour of one Krishna Pilla Raghavan Pillai by a registered mortgage deed No.2918/69 dated 17.09.1969. It is contended that although the property was under mortgage, Raghavan Pillai did not get poss