Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Moly Varghese, Joseph M. Varghese, and George M. Varghese, claim ownership and seek relief regarding a property they assert has been wrongfully claimed by the defendant, Elias. The case involves issues of boundary fixation and property rights stemming from prior litigation.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit brought by the plaintiffs due to res judicata as the subject matter had been previously decided in favor of the defendant. The plaintiffs failed to establish their claims over the disputed property.
Key Reasoning:
The suit was barred by res judicata as the matter had previously been decided in favor of the defendant.
The suit was barred by res judicata as the matter had previously been decided in favor of the defendant.
Why Defendant Won:
The suit was barred by res judicata as the matter had previously been decided in favor of the defendant.
The suit was barred by res judicata as the matter had previously been decided in favor of the defendant.
Supporting Evidence
It is clear on a perusal of the pleadings of the case that the relief sought for is not specific and that it is rather only asking for an omnibus declaration of rights of the plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
In view of the discussions made above, the suit is dismissed. The defendant is entitled to the costs of suit from the plaintiffs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Moly Varghese
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o. Late Varghese Mathew
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Joseph M. Varghese
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o. late Varghese Mathew
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- George M. Varghese
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o. late Varghese Mathew
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Elias
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- S/o. Varkey
Plaintiffs Documents
Land Tax Receipt, Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 1845/1989, Certified copy of Release Deed No. 4598/2007.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Judgment in O.S 1409/2016, Land Tax Receipt, Possession Certificate.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- N.C Sajith
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Reji George
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Binoy Davis
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Declaration of right of plaintiffs over plaint schedule item No.3 property.
Evidence:
The relief sought for as relief number (a), i.e.for the declaration of right of the plaintiffs over the plaint schedule item number 3 property is barred by res judicata and issue number I is answered so.
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing into the plaint item No.3 property.
Evidence:
In view of lack of proper identification of the plaint schedule properties, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff is not entitled to an order of injunction as prayed for.
Relief Type:
Fixation
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Fixation of eastern and western boundaries of plaint item No.2 property.
Evidence:
In view of the fact that there is no identification of the property before the court, for the reasons stated above, issue number IV is also to be answered as against the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Certified copy of Resurvey Plan
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof regarding identification of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented as evidence of the plaintiffs' claim to property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Certified copy of Sale Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented as evidence of the plaintiffs' claim to property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Certified copy of Release Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented to show transfer of property rights.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented as evidence of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented as evidence of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Certified copy of Plaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments in prior O.S. No. 1409/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Certified copy of written statement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments in prior O.S. No. 1409/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Certified copy of deposition
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments in prior O.S. No. 1409/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments in prior O.S. No. 1409/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Certified copy of decree
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments in prior O.S. No. 1409/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked to support arguments against res judicata.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Presented to establish proof of ownership and tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Presented to establish proof of possession.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof regarding property identification.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Survey Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof regarding property identification.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Additional Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked for further evidence regarding property identification.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
True Photostat Copy of Pages of Corelation Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Marked as evidence regarding old survey numbers.
Reference:
X1
Document Type:
True Photostat Copy of Pages of Corelation Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Marked as evidence regarding old survey numbers.
Reference:
X1(a)
Document Type:
True Photostat Copy of Pages of Corelation Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Marked as evidence regarding old survey numbers.
Reference:
X1(b)
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 Moly Varghese et al vs Elias regarding declaration, fixation of boundary, injunction and consequential reliefs.
Case Code Year
Case between Moly Varghese et al vs Elias regarding declaration, fixation of boundary, injunction and consequential reliefs.