SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Online)(KER) 59472

PREETHA – Appellant
Versus
DAMODHARAN PUTHIYAVEEDU – Respondent


Advocates:
['PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH', '', 'K JAYESH MOHANKUMAR', 'VANDANA MENON', 'VINEETHA JAMES', 'SRI T K VIPINDAS']

The trial court decreed the suit. It directed the defendants to

surrender possession of the house in the plaint schedule property to

the plaintiff. The second defendant filed appeal and it met dismissal.

Hence is she in second appeal.

2.

The case of the plaintiff goes as under: The suit property

belonged to the first defendant. He sold it to the plaintiff under Ext A2

sale deed. Accepting the request of the first defendant, he was

permitted by the plaintiff to reside in the house in the suit property for

three months. The second defendant is the wife of the first defendant.

They continue to stay in the house despite the demand of the plaintiff

to vacate it.

3.

The first defendant filed written-statement admitting

execution of Ext A2 sale deed by him in favour of the plaintiff. The

former in his written-statement requested for a period of one year to

surrender the house to the plaintiff.

4.

The second defendant contested the suit. She has the

following contentions: She being the wife of the first defendant is

entitled to reside in the house situated in the plaint schedule property.

Ext A2 is a sham document executed by the first defendant in collusion

with the plainti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top