Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. SATHISH NINAN, P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
PRIYANKA PRAMOD – Appellant
Versus
R.CHANDRA DAS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the claim regarding property. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. analysis of title and limitations. (Para 5 , 19) |
| 3. acceptance of gift and implications for minors. (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. suit limitations concerning declarations and possessions. (Para 20 , 24) |
| 5. final ruling on the appeal. (Para 26) |
JUDGMENT
P.Krishna Kumar, J.
The plaintiff in a suit for declaration and recovery of possession of an immovable property is in appeal against the decree passed by the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram rejecting the plaint claim.
2. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as they were arrayed in the suit. When the plaintiff was four years old, her maternal grandfather, Reghunatha Panicker, executed a settlement deed on 06.01.1990 (Ext. A1), reserving a life interest for the executant and his wife, the third defendant. Later, he executed a cancellation deed (Ext. A6) on 03.01.1996 purportedly revoking the transfer. Subsequently, he executed sale deeds (Exts. A7 and A8) in 1996 in favour of his sons, defendant Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, in respect of the said property. Regunatha Panicker died on 28.02.2009.
3. The plaintiff attained majority on 14.06.2004. Alleging that she came to know
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
