Case Summary
The case involves Lathika and Sheeja as plaintiffs, and Shajin Rajan and Vinitha as defendants. It is about the partition of property originally belonging to the deceased Krishnan Shaji, with the plaintiffs seeking relief from alleged harassment by the defendants.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing the residence of plaintiffs in the plaint schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit has been decreed with a preliminary decree of partition being passed. The plaintiffs are entitled to a 2/3 share of the property, while the first defendant is entitled to a 1/3 share.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The property was determined to be liable for partition, with clear evidence supporting the plaintiffs' entitlement to the majority share.
The property was determined to be liable for partition, with clear evidence supporting the plaintiffs' entitlement to the majority share.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The property was determined to be liable for partition, with clear evidence supporting the plaintiffs' entitlement to the majority share.
The property was determined to be liable for partition, with clear evidence supporting the plaintiffs' entitlement to the majority share.
Supporting Evidence
In light of the above discussion, I find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW1 that plaint schedule property is liable to be partitioned. Parties are governed by Hindu Succession Act.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed and a preliminary decree of partition is passed as given under: Plaint schedule property is ordered to be partitioned by metes and bounds into three equal shares.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Lathika
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- W/o late Shaji
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sheeja
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- D/o late Shaji
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shajin Rajan
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o late Shaji
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vinitha
- Party Age
- 24
- Relation
- W/o Shajin Rajan
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Patta No. 8495, Original of Patta No. 8495, Basic tax receipt for the period 2015-16, Copy of lawyer notice issued to defendant, Postal receipt.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Johnson Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nelson Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.D. Vincent
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M.K. Dileepan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- S. Karthik Menon
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from obstructing their residence in the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Accordingly I am satisfied that plaintiffs are entitled for an injunction as sought for.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A decree for partition was passed, with plaintiffs entitled to a 2/3 share in the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Accordingly, plaintiffs are jointly entitled for 2/3 share in plaint schedule property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Patta
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the claim of ownership of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Patta
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This original document verifies the ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as evidence of the tax payments associated with the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was issued to the defendant, urging partition of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt serves as evidence of sending the lawyer notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Lathika vs Shajin Rajan regarding partition and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Lathika vs Shajin Rajan regarding partition and injunction