Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Sathish Ninan, P. Krishna Kumar, JJ
K.G SUNIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
Sofika Antony – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim of marriage and inheritance rights. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. insufficient evidence of valid marriage. (Para 4 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. arguments regarding evidential deficiencies. (Para 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 4. appeals allowed; case remanded for further proceedings. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT
Sathish Ninan, J.
The original petition, seeking declaration of the status of the petitioners, reliefs of declaration and injunction in respect of the scheduled immovable properties, was decreed by the Family Court. The 1st and 2nd respondents in the original petition are the appellants in the respective appeals.
2. The plaint schedule properties, four in number, belonged to late Antony Pailee. He was employed in the Indian Air Force. The 1st petitioner claims to be his legally wedded wife, their marriage having been solemnised on 23.10.1968 at Jorhat, Assam. Petitioners 2 and 3 are claimed to be the children born in the wedlock. It is alleged that the 1st respondent, claiming to be the wife and sole legal heir of late Antony Pailee, has assigned the petition schedule items 2 and 3 to the 2nd respondent. The petitioners seek a declaration of the marital status of the 1st petitioner and that petiti
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
