Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S., J
BHARGAVI – Appellant
Versus
KARTHIKEYAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of partition suit and trial proceedings. (Para 2) |
| 2. substantial questions on proof of settlement deed. (Para 3) |
| 3. burden to prove disputed deed under evidence act. (Para 4) |
| 4. invalid attestation; scribe lacks animo attestandi. (Para 6) |
| 5. adverse inference; appeal allowed restoring decree. (Para 8 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
This appeal is against the judgment in A.S. No. 12 of 2017 on the files of Sub Court, Cherthala, which reversed the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 165 of 2014 of the Principal Munsiff Court, Cherthala.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:-
2.1. The property covering 10 cents originally belonged to late Madhavan, the father of the 2nd plaintiff and defendant and the husband of the 1st plaintiff. Late Madhavan obtained kudikidappu right as per Pattayam No. 6518/1972. On his death, the plaintiffs claimed partition. The defendant resisted the suit contending that by settlement deed No. 275 of 1995 of SRO, Kuthiathodu, the father had gifted the entire property to him. The plaintiffs amended the suit contending that the gift deed is null and void since it was executed by playing undue influence on the father by the defe
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
