Case Summary
KUNHAMI, the plaintiff, sought a final decree for partition against the defendants, who include the heirs of PATHU VALIYAPARAMBHATH. The case revolves around the division of property according to a preliminary decree issued previously.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Partition of property into three equal shares
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ordered the partition of the property into three equal shares among the parties involved as per the preliminary decree. Each party is entitled to their respective shares as evaluated by the commission report.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the preliminary decree was valid and the commission report supported the partition claims.
The court found that the preliminary decree was valid and the commission report supported the partition claims.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the preliminary decree was valid and the commission report supported the partition claims.
The court found that the preliminary decree was valid and the commission report supported the partition claims.
Supporting Evidence
As per the discussions in the commission report and preliminary decree and judgment dated 25.09.2015, a final decree is passed as follows: The plaint schedule property is divided into 3 equal parts.
Judgment Evidence:
Thus as per the preliminary decree for partition in the property the plaintiff/petitioner have taken out a commission and the Advocate Commissioner had measured out the property with the assistance of a Taluk Surveyor.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- KUNHAMI
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- PATHU VALIYAPARAMBHATH
- Relation
- Died
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- HABEEB THAZHAVADAKKAYIL
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SULAIKHA
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SUBAIR
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SOORA
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Commission Report filed by Adv. U. V. Pradeepan, Surveyor Plan filed by Adv. U. V. Pradeepan.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P. Divakaran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to partition and separate possession of her 1/3 share of the property.
Evidence:
Plot No.C shown in C2 plan which is of 0.0361 area in hector is allotted to the separate share of the petitioner/plaintiff and is entitled to get partition and separate possession of her respective share.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The second respondent is entitled to partition and separate possession of their share.
Evidence:
Plot A shown in Ext. C2 plan which is of 0.0361 area in hector is allotted to the separate share of the 2nd respondent/2nd defendant and is entitled to partition and separate possession of respective share.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The legal heirs of the first respondent are entitled to partition and separate possession of their respective shares.
Evidence:
Plot No.B shown in C2 plan which is of 0.0361 area in hector is allotted to the separate share of the legal heirs of the 1st respondent/1st defendant and are entitled to get partition and separate possession of their respective shares.
Relief Type:
Financial Amount
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioner is directed to pay amounts to the second respondent and legal heirs of the first respondent.
Evidence:
Towards the equity of shares the petitioner has to give an amount of Rs.11,576/- to the second respondent and an amount of Rs. 7,726/- to the legal heirs of the first respondent.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The Advocate Commissioner submitted the commission report, which includes measurements and identification of the property to be partitioned.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Surveyor plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The Surveyor Plan filed by the Advocate Commissioner illustrates the division of the property into three equal parts.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Share List
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The share lists provide details on the equity shares and valuations relevant to the partition proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.C3 series
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between KUNHAMI vs PATHU VALIYAPARAMBHATH et al regarding partition of property
Case Code Year
Case between KUNHAMI vs PATHU VALIYAPARAMBHATH et al regarding partition of property