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

2011 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17097

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HEMA, J
P.RAGHAVAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
KRISHNA PILLAI – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.K.B.PRADEEP

JUDGMENT

A suit was filed before Munsiff Court by first respondent against appellant (D2) and his wife (D1) for declaration of title, possession and for putting up of boundary and also for injunction. During the pendancy of the suit, appellant's wife (D1) died and hence respondents 2 to 5 were impleaded as additional defendants. After trial by Munsiff Court, the suit was dismissed with costs. In appeal, Additional District Court set aside the decree and judgment and decreed the suit as follows:

“i. The plaintiff's title and possession over the plaint schedule property is hereby declared.

ii. The plaintiff is allowed to put up a boundary through the A B line shown in Ext.C1(a) plan for separating the plaint schedule property from the property of defendants.

iii. The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the paint schedule property and from committing waste theron.

iv. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs in this appeal and in the [S.A.145/2001] 2 suit. Ext.C1(a) plan will form part of the decree.”

The said decree and judgment are challenged by second defendant in the second appeal.

2. A suit was filed by first r

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