Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Easwaran S., J
A.P.SUNDARAN – Appellant
Versus
RAMAKRISHNAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the plaintiff filed for boundary fixation due to alleged encroachment. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. the appellant contends the advocate commissioner's report is erroneous. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. the maintainability of the suit without a recovery claim is questioned. (Para 11 , 12 , 17) |
| 4. the court found the advocate commissioner's report lacks evidentiary value. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. the appeal is allowed, and the case is remanded for fresh consideration. (Para 28) |
JUDGMENT
The appellant herein is the 1st defendant in O.S. No.557 of 2004 on the files of the Munsiff Court, Chittur and the appellant in AS No.136 of 2010 on the files of the II Additional District Court, Palakkad.
2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are as follows:
The respondent herein/plaintiff filed O.S. No.557 of 2004 seeking for fixation of boundary, and mandatory and prohibitory injunction directing the appellant/defendant to remove the trees that were planted in the property belonging to the plaintiff. The plaint A schedule property belongs to the plaintiff’s father, Sri. Krishnankutty Ezhuthassan, as per the partition deed No.1615/ 1979 of SRO, Chittur. Consequent to the death of the
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
