Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1317/2016

Case between D.Santhosh Kumar vs S.Valsala Kumari regarding declaration of title over properties

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-01-17
Duration
approximately-8 years 1 month 17 days
Case Code No.
1317
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

D.Santhosh Kumar filed a suit against S.Valsala Kumari for declaration of title over certain properties based on a Will. The court allowed a petition to summon a thumb impression register for evidence.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the application to summon evidence for proving the execution of the settlement deed, which was essential for the case.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the application to summon evidence for proving the execution of the settlement deed, which was essential for the case.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found it necessary to allow the petition to gather evidence crucial for the case.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Having considered nature of suit and relief and sought for, in order to prove the execution for the impugned document, it is highly necessary to summon the thumb impression register of Sub Registrar Office.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence I am inclined to allow the application. IA. 2/ 2022 stands allowed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
D.Santhosh Kumar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
S.Valsala Kumari
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Jaideep G. Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Arun.G
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Allowed the application to summon the thumb impression register.
Evidence:
Hence I am inclined to allow the application. IA. 2/ 2022 stands allowed.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Thumb Impression Register
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Necessary to summon for comparison of disputed signature of executant.
Reference:

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2016

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won