Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
Original Suit No. 123 OF 2016

Case between Jayachandran vs Mohan et al regarding partition of property

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR
Judge
Sri. JANKISH NARAYANAN
Order Date
2019-07-30
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Jayachandran, the plaintiff, filed a suit for partition and separate allotment of his share in a property. The court has passed an order allowing the partition based on a preliminary decree.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the petition for partition, dividing the property into five equal shares, and directed the respondents to pay certain amounts for equalization of shares.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Interlocutory Application
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The Advocate Commissioner has effected division of property in tune with the preliminary decree.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed and final decree for partition is passed as follows: I. The decree schedule properties shall be divided into 5 (five) equal shares by mets and bounds.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Jayachandran (39 years) Vettom amsom, Padiyam desom, Tirur Taluk.

Defendants

Mohan (49 years) Vettathumkare House. Vijayakumari (41 years) Kundattil House. Sunil (36 years) Vettathumkare House. Lenin (33 years) Vettathumkare House.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Final decree for partition of the property as per the preliminary decree.
Evidence:
I hold a view that the Advocate Commissioner has effected division of property in tune with the preliminary decree.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Cost of proceedings allowed in favor of the plaintiff.
Evidence:
The cost of the proceedings allowed in favor of the plaintiff is Rs. 9902/-.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The report was submitted by the Advocate Commissioner detailing the division of property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The plan submitted by the Advocate Commissioner showing the allotment of shares to the parties.
Reference:
Ext.C2

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases