Case Summary
Abdul Rahman filed a petition for a final decree for partition of property against Muhammed Kutty. The preliminary decree for partition was passed on 20.01.2017, and the case involves the division of shares in the property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Final decree for partition granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition by Abdul Rahman for final decree for partition is allowed. The property is to be divided into two equal shares, with specific plots allocated to each party.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The Advocate Commissioner effectively divided the property in accordance with the preliminary decree.
The Advocate Commissioner effectively divided the property in accordance with the preliminary decree.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Since Advocate Commissioner effected division of the property in an equitable manner in tune with the preliminary decree, I hold a view that Ext.C1 report and C2 plan can be accepted and final decree for partition can be passed.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed and final decree for partition is passed as follows:- i. The decree schedule property shall be divided into 2 (Two) equal shares by metes and bounds.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Abdul Rahman
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Muhammed Kutty
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Preliminary decree for partition dated 20.01.2017, Ext. C1 report, C2 plan
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. T. R. Vijayan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Court
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Basil
- Appearance Type
- Unknown
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Final decree for partition allowing the petitioner to possess the allotted share of the property.
Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed and final decree for partition is passed as follows:- i. The decree schedule property shall be divided into 2 (Two) equal shares by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Payment
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioner is ordered to pay Rs. 450/- to the respondent towards equalisation of shares.
Evidence:
The petitioner shall pay an amount of Rs. 450/- to the respondent, towards equalisation of shares.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commissioner Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report filed by the Advocate Commissioner detailing the division of property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The plan filed by the Advocate Commissioner showing the allotment of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Abdul Rahman vs Muhammed Kutty regarding partition
Case Code Year
Case between Abdul Rahman vs Muhammed Kutty regarding partition