Case Summary
The case involves a dispute over partitioning property originally owned by Padmavathy Amma. The plaintiff, Kalyani Mohan, seeks to claim her share against the defendants, who are her siblings and a leaseholder.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Partition and recovery of Rs.1,80,000
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed that the plaintiff is entitled to a partition and ordered the defendants to pay her 1/4th share of the property and recover Rs.1,80,000.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the plaintiff's claim for partition valid based on co-ownership established through legal documents.
The court found the plaintiff's claim for partition valid based on co-ownership established through legal documents.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found the plaintiff's claim for partition valid based on co-ownership established through legal documents.
The court found the plaintiff's claim for partition valid based on co-ownership established through legal documents.
Supporting Evidence
Admittedly the plaint schedule property originally belonged to Padmavathy Amma along with the father of the plaintiff and defendant No.1 and 2 as per Ext.A1 partition deed. Hence the plaintiff had sent Ext.A3 registered notice requested the defendants demanding partition of the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: A) The plaintiff is entitled to get partition and separation possession of 1/4th share of plaint schedule property by metes and bounds. B) Plaintiff is allowed to recover Rs.1,80,000/(Rupees One lakh Eighty thousand only) from 2nd defendant or from his assets. C) The plaintiff is also entitled to get the costs of the suit from the defendant Nos. 1 to 3.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kalyani Mohan
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- N.Mohan
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Dr. N.Kochupillai
- Party Age
- 78
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- N.Dhanapalan
- Party Age
- 72
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- N.Jayasurya
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The proprietor, Milan Silk house (Milan Design)
Plaintiffs Documents
Partition deed No.3317/1979, Settlement deed No.260/2013, Legal notice dated 09.03.2018
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Shihabudheen.T
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Stephine Rajeev
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- G.Harikumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rasna Vijayan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M.S Unnikrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.Sunil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Veena C.V
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Christine Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Susan Jacob
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to get partition and separation possession of 1/4th share of plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed as follows: A) The plaintiff is entitled to get partition and separation possession of 1/4th share of plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to recover Rs.1,80,000/- from the 2nd defendant or from his assets.
Evidence:
B) Plaintiff is allowed to recover Rs.1,80,000/- (Rupees One lakh Eighty thousand only) from 2nd defendant or from his assets.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to get the costs of the suit from the defendants Nos. 1 to 3.
Evidence:
C) The plaintiff is also entitled to get the costs of the suit from the defendants Nos. 1 to 3.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To show that the plaintiff is claiming the property based on the partition deed No.3317/1979.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To show that the father of the plaintiff executed a settlement deed in favor of the plaintiff regarding a 1/4th undivided share.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To demonstrate that the plaintiff demanded partition of the property through a legal notice.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Postal Receipts
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To prove that the legal notice was served to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To indicate that the defendants received the legal notice.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
General Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To establish the authority of the plaintiff's representative in the suit.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Specific power of attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To further establish the authority of the plaintiff's representative in the suit.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
To show the lease agreement regarding the usage of the plaint schedule property by the fourth defendant.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Kalyani Mohan vs Dr. N.Kochupillai, N.Dhanapalan, N.Jayasurya et al regarding partition and realization of money.
Case Code Year
Case between Kalyani Mohan vs Dr. N.Kochupillai, N.Dhanapalan, N.Jayasurya et al regarding partition and realization of money.