Case Summary
The plaintiff, Khadeeja, is seeking a partition of the property that originally belonged to her mother. The defendants are the legal heirs of her deceased brother, and they did not appear in court.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Preliminary decree for partition
Case Type
Partition Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit for partition, awarding specific shares of the property to the plaintiff and defendants. The property will be divided into 216 equal shares.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained unchallenged as the defendants opted to remain ex parte.
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained unchallenged as the defendants opted to remain ex parte.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained unchallenged as the defendants opted to remain ex parte.
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained unchallenged as the defendants opted to remain ex parte.
Supporting Evidence
The property devolved upon her son Syed Abdulla and daughter plaintiff. After his death, his 2/3 share in the property devolved upon his legal heirs, defendants. ...I find no reason to disbelieve PW1. Therefore, I am satisfied that the plaintiff has proved his case by adducing cogent and reliable evidence.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed and a preliminary decree for partition is passed as follows:- I. The plaint B schedule property shall be divided into 216 equal shares by metes and bounds. II. The plaintiff is entitled to get 114 shares, out of such 216 shares in the plaint B schedule properties.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Khadeeja
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ummayyakutty
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Noorjahan
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Fatheevi
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ramla.K.P.
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Extract of Adangal Register from Thalakkad Village.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.A.Ismail
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A preliminary decree for partition of the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
Hence the plaintiff is entitled to a decree as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Adangal Register
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as proof of the plaintiff's claim regarding the property and its ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This document provides a report related to the commission appointed to assess the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This document outlines the plan prepared by the Advocate Commissioner for the property assessment.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Partition Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Khadeeja vs Ummayyakutty et al regarding Partition
Case Code Year
Case between Khadeeja vs Ummayyakutty et al regarding Partition