T.K.RAMACHANDRAN, (DIED - LHRS IMPLEADED) vs V.APPUKUTTAN

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 6996

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S., J
T.K.RAMACHANDRAN, (DIED - LHRS IMPLEADED) – Appellant
Versus
V.APPUKUTTAN – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN, SRI.N.C.MOHANAN, SHRI.ABRAHAM MATHAN, SHRI.ATHUL TOM
For the Respondents: SHRI.M.V.S.NAMPOOTHIRY

Table of Content
1. appeal regarding injunction suit. (Para 1 , 2)
2. substantial questions of law outlined. (Para 3 , 4)
3. arguments from both parties presented. (Para 5 , 6)
4. court observations and considerations. (Para 7 , 8)

JUDGMENT

2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:

3. On 8.6.2018, this Court admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law:

2. What is the extent of the right acquired by express grant or reservation when the same does not specifically define it?”

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that even if a right of easement by grant is prescribed under Ext.A2 partition deed, the plaintiff having failed to prove the existence of the pathway as specified under plaint item No.2, the trial court had rightly dismissed the suit. The first appellate court, on a completely wrong appreciation of the evidence, had concluded that the plaintiff had proved his case and thereby decreed the suit, which is unsustainable. It is further contended that, going by the report of the advocate commissioner, the pathway as prescribed under Ext.A2 partition deed is not in existence beyond the North of the property. At any