Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
SOUDHA NISHA – Appellant
Versus
AYSHA BEEVI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. family disputes related to property and legal occupancy. (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court observes evidence of occupancy without ownership. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. time period granted for eviction under license revocation. (Para 8) |
| 4. formal dismissal of appeal. (Para 9) |
JUDGMENT
1. The 2nd and 5th defendants in a suit are the appellants.
They are a mother and a minor son. The suit for mandatory injunction for eviction was filed by the plaintiff, a lady against her son, daughter in law and three children who are arrayed as defendants 1 to 5. The Trial Court decreed the suit, and the First Appellate Court confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court.
2. I heard the learned counsel for the appellant Sri.
Anandakrishan A. Kartha.
3. The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are: As per the plaint allegations, the defendants 2 to 5 have been residing in the plaint schedule property along with the plaintiff on account of the marriage of the 2nd defendant with the 1st defendant. There occurred certain disputes between defendants 1 and 2, and the 2nd defendant has initiated several litigation against the 1st defendant. The defendants have been residing in th
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
