Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Devan Ramachandran, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
TREESA POULOSE – Appellant
Versus
JOHN POULOSE @ RAJU – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and ownership claims by the petitioners. (Para 3 , 4 , 12) |
| 2. arguments presented by both parties regarding ownership rights. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence and presumption of equal ownership. (Para 10 , 20 , 25) |
| 4. ratio decidendi regarding equal contribution in joint ownership. (Para 26) |
| 5. final ruling on partition and acknowledgment of the petitioner's entitlement. (Para 28 , 30) |
JUDGMENT
M.B.Snehalatha, J
In this appeal, the appellants who are the petitioners in O.P. No.1087/2011 of Family Court, Ernakulam call into question the legality and propriety of the judgment and decree of dismissal of the said O.P by the Family Court, Ernakulam.
2. The parties shall be referred to in this appeal as per their rank in O.P.NO.1087/2011.
3. Shorn of unnecessary details, averments in O.P.No.1087/2011 are as follows:
The marriage of the 1st petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 26.1.1987 as per the rites and customs of the Christian community. The second petitioner is the son born to them in the said wedlock. The 1st petitioner was given 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments and ₹50,000/- from her house at the time of marriage. The respondent was e
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
