Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS 139/2024

Case between HAMEED HAJI KINARULLA PARAMBATH vs MUHAMMAD IQBAL CHETTYAM VEETTIL regarding the appointment of Advocate commissioner for property identification

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Judge
Sri. Yadukrishnan. B
Order Date
2025-11-28
Duration
approximately-1 year
Case Code No.
139
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Hameed Haji Kinarulla Parambath filed a petition seeking the appointment of an Advocate commissioner to identify the plaint schedule property. Muhammad Iqbal Chettyam Veettile raised objections regarding the plaintiff's possession and the identification of the property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the petition for the appointment of an Advocate commissioner to identify the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Appointment of Advocate commissioner
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for the appointment of an Advocate commissioner to identify the plaint schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found it necessary to clarify the identity of the property in question for a proper resolution of the dispute.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found it necessary to clarify the identity of the property in question for a proper resolution of the dispute.
Supporting Evidence
The petition has to be allowed in the interest of justice to determine a real question of controversy between the parties.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, IA 7/2025 is allowed and deposit the commission batta of Rs.5,000/- before the court within 5 days.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
HAMEED HAJI KINARULLA PARAMBATH
Party Age
53
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
MUHAMMAD IQBAL CHETTYAM VEETTIL
Party Age
49
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
HAMEED KAVILUMPARA
Party Age
41
Relation
Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. N. M. Rajagopal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Adeeb Salah
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. C. R. Biju
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Advocate Vivek K. P.
Appearance Type
Government Pleader

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petition to appoint an Advocate commissioner to identify the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Hence, in the interest of the justice to determine a real question of controversy between the parties the petition has to be allowed.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2024

Quick Facts

Location
Nadapuram, Kozhikode District
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between CHANDRAN vs SECRETARY et al regarding petition dismissal for default
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between N. P. PADMAKUMAR et al vs KASTHURIKUNI MOIDU HAJI et al regarding reopening evidence.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between KOMBIYULLATHIL THAZHAKUNIYIL ALTHAF vs KURUNNAM VEETTIL ABDULLA et al regarding issuance of summons
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Meethale Arayammal Ismayil vs Kokkandiyeri Mahamood regarding setting aside of an ex parte decree.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between JANU vs BAHULEYAN @ BABU regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won