Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S., J
C.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN S/O.KRISHNA PILLAI, CHALIYIL, VAYALAR – Appellant
Versus
ANANDAVALLY AMMA D/O. BHARGAVI AMMA, MANI NIVAS, CHARAMANGALAM MURI, MUHAMMA P.O, PIN 688 525, ALAPPUZHA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding plaintiffs' claims and defendants' counterclaims (Para 3 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's analysis of mortgage validity and limitation (Para 4 , 5 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 21 , 22 , 24) |
| 4. application of limitation act and constructive notice (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court’s answers to substantial questions of law (Para 28) |
| 6. modified decree and property shares (Para 29) |
| 7. final conclusion and orders of the court (Para 30) |
JUDGMENT
2. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:
3. The 1st defendant resisted the suit by contending that the plaintiffs have no right to claim partition and that the right, if any, of the plaintiffs has been lost by adverse possession. It was stated that an earlier suit filed by the plaintiffs herein as O.S.No.339/2000 was dismissed and later the present suit was filed, which is not permissible. The defendants also questioned the relationship between the parties and even went to the extent of stating that the plaintiffs are not the brothers of the 1st defendant. In order to prove the relationship, the plaintiffs called upon the husband of the 1st defendant, K
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
