HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. BADHARUDEEN, J
OMANA – Appellant
Versus
LEELA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defendant's contentions (Para 7) |
| 2. trial court recorded evidence (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 3. principle not applicable (Para 12) |
| 4. regular second appeal dismissed (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of January, 2024 Defendant in O.S.No.352/2011 on the files of the Additional Munsiff Court, Cherthala, is the appellant and he has filed this Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 r/w Order XLII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, through Legal Aid Counsel.
Respondents are the plaintiffs in the suit.
2. The appellant assails decree and judgment in the above suit, dated 20.9.2014 and decree and judgment in A.S.No.84/2014 on the files of the Sub Court, Cherthala, whereby, the trial court verdict was confirmed.
3. Heard both sides in detail. Perused the records.
4. I shall refer the parties in this appeal as 'plaintiffs' and 'defendant', for convenience.
5. At the time of admission, my learned predecessor, as per order, dated 6.2.2023, raised the following substantial questions of law:
(A) Whether court below went wrong in holding that whatever is fixed to soil or goes with soil belongs to the soil which is held to be not applicable in India as p
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.