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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 314/2024

Case between Kuriakose vs Eldho regarding partition

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Alshari A.
Order Date
2025-02-14
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Kuriakose, the petitioner, seeks a temporary injunction to prevent Eldho from alienating property that should be partitioned among them. The case revolves around a family settlement and conflicting claims to property inherited from their mother, Annamma.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the petition for temporary injunction, stating that the petitioner did not establish a strong prima facie case or balance of convenience in his favor regarding the property claims.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored the defendant.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition stands dismissed.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Kuriakose (67 years) Thanthalakkattu House, Mamala P.O., Muriyamangalam, Thruvaniyoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pin : 682306

Defendants

Eldho (58 years) Thanthalakkattu House, Mudakkuzha P.O., Thrikkepara, Vengoor West Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pin : 683546

Reliefs

Relief Type: Temporary Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Petitioner sought a temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from alienating the property.
Evidence:
Therefore, I could not find the petitioner to be entitled for the relief of temporary injunction as prayed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No. 2051/1993 of SRO, Kuruppampady, establishing prior ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No. 1790/1999 of SRO, Kuruppampady, alleged to be fraudulently created.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Settlement Deed No. 2051/1993 of SRO, Kuruppampady, supporting the defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Settlement Deed No. 1790/1999 of SRO, Kuruppampady, supporting the defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Release deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of release deed No. 1001/2012 of SRO, Kuruppampady, showing change of property rights.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of land tax receipt showing payment made by the 1st respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of land tax receipt showing payment made by the 1st respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of land tax receipt showing payment made by the 1st respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of land tax receipt showing payment made by the 1st respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 2198/2002 of the SRO, Kuruppampady.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report and rough sketch submitted by Adv. Jyothi C.R., detailing the lie and nature of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch submitted by Adv. Jyothi C.R., accompanying the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)

Quick Facts

Location
Perumbavoor, Ernakulam District, Kerala
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases