Case Summary
The plaintiffs, who are the legal heirs of late Nedumpuram Gopalan, are seeking a partition of the plaint schedule property which is claimed to be jointly owned. The defendants contested the plaintiffs' claims, asserting their own rights to the property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in part that the plaint schedule property is joint property of the plaintiffs and defendants, and divided the shares among them accordingly.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court determined that the plaint schedule property is jointly owned by all legal heirs as per the evidence presented.
The court determined that the plaint schedule property is jointly owned by all legal heirs as per the evidence presented.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court determined that the plaint schedule property is jointly owned by all legal heirs as per the evidence presented.
The court determined that the plaint schedule property is jointly owned by all legal heirs as per the evidence presented.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence on record clearly indicates that the plaint schedule property is a joint property belonging to all the legal heirs of late Gopalan, and the second defendant cannot claim any preferential right.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed in part as follows: It is hereby declared that the plaint schedule property is the joint property of the plaintiffs and defendants, being the remaining property of late Nedumpuram Gopalan.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Gopi N G
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Santha Haridas
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Leela Krishnankutty
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sudheesh K S
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Suraj K S
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mani N G
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sheela
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Subrahmanyan
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
A1-02/12/64-Partition Deed No.3526/1964 of SRO, Perumbavoor.
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K M Alias
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P K Shiju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P V Shiji
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Biji Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Declaration of the plaint schedule property as joint property of the plaintiffs and defendants.
Evidence:
It is hereby declared that the plaint schedule property is the joint property of the plaintiffs and defendants, being the remaining property of late Nedumpuram Gopalan.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Entitlement of plaintiffs and defendants to their respective shares in the property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs 1 to 3 are entitled jointly to 9/18 shares, the plaintiffs 4 and 5 are entitled jointly to 2/18 shares, the defendants 1 and 2 are entitled jointly to 6/18 shares, and the third defendant is entitled to 1/18 share in the plaint schedule property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as the basis for the plaintiffs' claim of ownership and partition of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Gopi N G et al vs Mani N G et al regarding partition
Case Code Year
Case between Gopi N G et al vs Mani N G et al regarding partition