IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ TH MONDAY, THE 24 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1946 CRP NO. 402 OF 2024 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 11.09.2024 IN I.A. No.

3/2024 IN OS NO.1074 OF 2024 OF RENT CONTROL COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN I.A.No.3/24/DEFENDANT IN O.S.:

DEEPTI SIVAN AGED 49 YEARS D/O VASANTHA PILLAY, 2A, 2ND FLOOR, SILVER OAKS APARTMENT, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 011 –

BY ADVS. NISHA GEORGE GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)

N.ANAND SIDHARTH.R.WARIYAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN I.A. No.3/24/PLAINTIFF IN O.S.:

JYOTHI HARIDRANATH AGED 55 YEARS D/O. VASANTHAPILLAY, 202, LANDMARK APARTMENTS, NO.1, MOYENVILLE ROAD, LANGFORD TOWN, BANGALORE NORTH, KARNATAKA STATE, PIN 560 025 –

BY ADVS. R.T.PRADEEP NAIR AJAY KRISHNAN(N-122)

NIRANJAN T. PRADEEP(K/001073/2024)

THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

04.02.2025, THE COURT ON 24.02.2025, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

C.R.

P.M. MANOJ, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CRP No. 402 of 2024 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated this the 24^th day of February, 2025

JUDGMENT

The Revision Petition is preferred by the defendant in OS No.1074/2024 of the Rent Control Court, Thiruvananthapuram being aggrieved by order dated 11.09.2024, whereby the petitioner’s objection to the Suit was declined. The parties in the Revision Petition will hereinafter be referred as to their status before the trial court.

2. Originally the suit is for a mandatory injunction. The plaintiff and the defendant are sisters. They are the children of late Vasantha Pillai, who died on 22.02.2022, intestate, as far as plaint A schedule property is concerned. Plaint A schedule is nothing but a de-mat account with the Sharekhan Limited in the name of late Vasantha Pillai. The defendant was a nominee of the mother in the de-mat account No.1208670001323727 with HDFC Securities.

3. When the plaintiff verified the status of the de-mat account in the name of her mother with the HDFC Securities, it was informed that the said account was closed on 18.04.2022 by the defendant. She had transferred the entire holdings belonging to her mother by using her status as the nominee to the mother. She has been in possession of holdings of the account for more than the last two years. She has neither disclosed anything about the transactions in the mother’s de-mat account nor she had accounted or transferred 1/4^th right of the value and profits of those shares, which is transferred to de-mat account Number 12036000-05582065 with Sharekhan Limited, which is plaint B schedule.

4. The case of the plaintiff in the suit is that the defendant, being the nominee, was legally bound to account to the legal heirs of Vasantha Pillai, which includes two brothers of the plaintiff and the defendant. However, the said legal heirs had not raised a claim for their shares till this time and they are not party to the proceedings. The plaintiff has preferred the suit alleging that the defendant had failed to transfer the share of plaint A schedule property, i.e. 1/ 4^th share of the holdings of Late Vasantha Pillai, to the de-mat account of the plaintiff. The Suit was preferred after giving sufficient opportunity by preferring legal demand notice. The reliefs sought in the suit is to grant decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendant/nominee of the deceased mother to transfer 1/4^th share of the holdings of Late Vasantha Pillai given in plaint A schedule property as specifically provided in plaint B schedule property along with the 1/4^th of the dividend received in the de-mat account of the defendant with respect to the asset holdings of Late Vasantha Pillai till date into the de-mat account number of the plaintiff, within the time fixed by the court.

5. Along with the suit, the plaintiff preferred I.A. No.1 of 2024 for temporary injunction against which a counter affidavit has been preferred by the defendant. Thereafter a petition was fil