Case Summary
This case involves a petition to remove the third defendant from a civil suit. The plaintiff argues that the third defendant is a necessary party due to ongoing disputes over a property in connection with the suit.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The court determined that the third defendant's presence was essential for resolving the issues at hand in the suit.
The court determined that the third defendant's presence was essential for resolving the issues at hand in the suit.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, 1) The above petition is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Anoop D (34 years)
Ambady House, Karikode, Mulakulam, Kottayam, Pin- 686610
D D Diamond Valley Apartment Owners Association (37 years)
Edachira, Kakkanad
Unnikrishnan P P (62 years)
Perumkarukayil, Mayithara P O, Cherthala South, Alappuzha
Defendants
Sreenivasan P P (68 years)
Painakkil Veettil, BSNL Road, Kakkanad Kara, Kakkanad Village, Kanayannur Taluk
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Petition to delete the 3rd defendant from the party array.
Evidence:
Therefore he cannot be deleted from the party array. Accordingly I find no merit in the above petition.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The commission report mentioned articles belonging to the plaintiff in the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
The court considered oral arguments from both sides.
Reference: