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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 960/2024

Case between Karthiyayini et al vs Sharadha et al regarding partition of property

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-10-04
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Karthiyayini and Rajamma, are seeking partition of property that belonged to late Sri. Thevan. The defendants contest the description of the property and claim a different share distribution.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the plaintiffs' petition for the appointment of an advocate commissioner to measure the property. It was determined that this petition was premature as the preliminary decree is yet to be passed.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the IA stands dismissed.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Karthiyayini (78 years) Puthanpurayil House, Vezhaparambil, Mulamthuruthy P.O., Mulamthuruthy, Pin 682 314 Rajamma (66 years) Vaszamelil House, Chittethukara, CSEZ P.O, Kakkanad, Pin 682 037

Defendants

Sharadha (62 years) Vazhamelil House, Vettikkal P.O., Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam Pin. 682 314 Chandran (57 years) Vazhamelil House, Vettikkal P.O., Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam Pin. 682 314 Krishnan (68 years) Vazhamelil House, Vettikkal P.O., Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam Pin. 682 314 Gopi (57 years) Vazhamelil House, Vettikkal P.O., Mulamthuruthy, Ernakulam Pin. 682 314

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Request for appointing an advocate commissioner with the assistance of the village officer for measuring properties.
Evidence:
the petition herein is premature and that there is no need for the deputation of an advocate commissioner as prayed for in the petition at hand.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Document
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
These documents establish the ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Nos. 541/1961 and No. 1603/1964 of SRO Mulanthuruthy
Document Type: Document
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This document details the transfer of 5 cents of land to the 3rd respondent.
Reference:
No. 2541/1994 of SRO Mulanthuruthy
Document Type: Document
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
This document discusses the release of part of the property to the 4th respondent.
Reference:
No. 861/2000 of SRO Mulanthuruthy
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Oral submissions made by both parties during the hearing.
Reference:

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases