Case Summary
The plaintiffs are seeking a partition and permanent prohibitory injunction regarding a property. The defendant did not appear for the proceedings, leading to a default judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Partition of property and permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The claim of the plaintiffs remains unchallenged and undisputed due to the defendant's absence.
The claim of the plaintiffs remains unchallenged and undisputed due to the defendant's absence.
Judgment Evidence:
The suit is preliminary decreed as follows: The 2nd plaintiff is entitled to partition and separate possession over 1/12th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Leelamma (74 years years)
Puthenveedu, Vennala P.O, Ernakulam District
Sasidharan (70 years years)
B9 Changapuzha Nagar, S. Kalamassery, Ernakulam District
Kaladharan (65 years years)
Puthenveedu. Vennala P.O, Ernakulam District
Subramanian P.V (59 years years)
Puthenveedu, near St. Antony’s High School, Panangadu, Ernakulam District
P.B.Rajeswari (56 years years)
Viliayathara house, Koombayil road, Panangadu, Ernakulam District
Defendants
P.B.Sivanandan (53 years years)
Puthenveedu, Anandapuram, Kompara Junction, Ernakulam District – 682 018
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The 2nd plaintiff is entitled to partition and separate possession over 1/12th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The 2nd plaintiff is entitled to partition and separate possession over 1/12th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs No.19 to 21 are jointly entitled to partition and separate possession over 1/12th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
plaintiffs No.19 to 21 are jointly entitled to partition and separate possession over 1/12th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs 4 to 8 and defendant are jointly entitled to have partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs 4 to 8 and defendant are jointly entitled to have partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs 9 to 13 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs 9 to 13 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff No.18 is entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Plaintiff No.18 is entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs 22 to 27 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs 22 to 27 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs 15 to 17 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs 15 to 17 are jointly entitled to get partition and separate possession over 1/6th share over plaint schedule property by metes and bounds.
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendant, their men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from doing any acts in such a way making the feasible partition of plaint schedule property become impossible.
Evidence:
The defendant, their men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from doing any acts in such a way making the feasible partition of plaint schedule property become impossible or from committing any sort of waste therein.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the Sale deed bearing no. 253/1111 (Malayalam Era) of Ernakulam SRO.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Building Assessment Book
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the building assessment book bearing no. 3244 issued by Corporation of Kochi.
Reference:
Ext.A2