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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 21805

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. Babu, J, J.
MOLY ANDREW – Appellant
Versus
ANTONY – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents:

JUDGMENT

These Original Petitions arise from O.S.No.844/2014 and O.S.No.16/2014 on the file of the Munsiff’s Court, Aluva. The respondent in O.P.(C)No.1468/2021 is the plaintiff in O.S.No.16/2014, a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction in respect of the plaint schedule property against the defendant therein. Originally, O.S.No.844/2014 was instituted by one Andrew. He died during the course of proceedings and his legal representatives were brought into the party array. Thy are the petitioners in these Original Petitions.

2. O.S.No.844/2014 was filed for fixation of boundary separating the properties of the petitioners and the respondents.

3. The challenge in the O.P.(C)No.1468/2021 is to Ext.P11 order passed in an application seeking to set aside the report and plan submitted by the Advocate Commissioner. The defendant filed I.A.No.2261/2019 in O.S.No.16/2014 seeking to set aside the report and plan on the ground that plaint A schedule property therein has not been identified. The application was resisted by the plaintiff contending that the Commissioner prepared the report and plan based on the title deed, resurvey records and possession.

4. After hearing both sides, the Trial Co

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