Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No.1313/2022

Case between Alcina Netticadan vs Sarala et al regarding Extinguishment of easementary rights and other reliefs.

Court
THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2024-09-23
Duration
approximately-1 year 2 months 23 days
Case Closed
Mon, 09/23/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Alcina Netticadan is the plaintiff seeking the extinguishment of easementary rights claimed by the defendants, Sarala and Vanaja. The court found that the defendants have alternate access, rendering the easement unnecessary.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit in part, declaring that the defendants' easement of necessity over the plaintiff's property is extinguished.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree declaring the easement of necessity over Item No. 3 property as extinguished and costs of the suit to be realized from the defendants.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in part, declaring that the defendants' easement of necessity over the plaintiff's property is extinguished.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court established that the defendants have alternate means of access, making the original easement unnecessary.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court established that the defendants have alternate means of access, making the original easement unnecessary.
Supporting Evidence
It is made clear that the defendants are not using the item No.3 pathway for their ingress and egress, since they are having separate pathway, hence it can be concluded that the easement by necessity has come to an end.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed in part as follows. 1. A decree is hereby passed declaring that the easement of necessity of the defendants over plaint schedule item No. 3 property as extinguished.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Alcina Netticadan
Party Age
61
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sarala
Party Age
74
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vanaja
Party Age
71
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No.995/1991 of SRO Maradu, Certified copy of release Deed No.2019/2022 of SRO Maradu.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Saji Isaac
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Jithin Saji Isaac
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Elizabath Varkey
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Shamsudeen
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Ajeesh Immanuel
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Declaration that the easement of necessity of the defendants over the plaintiff schedule item No. 3 property is extinguished.
Evidence:
A decree is hereby passed declaring that the easement of necessity of the defendants over plaint schedule item No. 3 property as extinguished.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Entitlement of the plaintiff to realize costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize costs of the suit from defendants and from their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notarized copy of sale deed used to establish plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Release deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notarized copy of release deed used to support plaintiff's claim of property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Affidavit
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Affidavit of the owner of item No. 4 pathway indicating relinquishment of rights.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report detailing the status of the pathway and its non-use by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Alcina Netticadan vs Sarala et al regarding Extinguishment of easementary rights and other reliefs.
Case Code Year
Case between Alcina Netticadan vs Sarala et al regarding Extinguishment of easementary rights and other reliefs.

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Sat, 01/01/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 09/23/2024 - 12:00
From
Sun, 09/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Mon, 09/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won