Case Summary
Nanu Arettummal, the plaintiff, is seeking partition of the jointly owned property after the death of his father. The defendants are opposing this claim, stating the property is not identifiable and they're not in joint ownership with the plaintiff.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit for partition was dismissed as the court found that the plaint schedule property was not correctly identifiable and therefore not partible.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
This is a suit for partition and separate possession. The defendants 5 to 7 are found to have more probable claims regarding the property disputed.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nanu Arettummal
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- S/o. Late Kadungon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Narayani Nellikunnummal
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- D/o. Kadungon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kallyani Kallankoduparambhath
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- D/o. Kadungon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kumaran Arettummal
- Party Age
- 63
- Relation
- S/o. Kadungon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Krishnan Arettummal
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o. Kadungon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Asokan Arettummal
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o. Late Kannan
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Assignment Deed No. 148/74, Basic Tax Receipt issued by Village Office.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Partition Deed No. 1013 of 1973, Basic Tax Receipt issued by Village Officer.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. N. M. Rajagopal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Jamshid Anvar
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C. R. Biju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Padmanabhan Ponnamkott
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought partition and separate possession of the property.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiff is not entitled to seek a relief of partition and separate possession as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Title deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to establish the plaintiff's claim of ownership over the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to support the plaintiff's claim regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was indicated as evidence relevant to the plaintiff's rights over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document further establishes the plaintiff's tax records related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document certifies the plaintiff's claim of possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document provides evidence relating to the defendants' claim of ownership and possession.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Gift Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the defendants' claims regarding property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Order of Land Tribunal
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows relevant prior legal decisions affecting the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Purchase Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the defendants' claim of having purchased the property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document establishes defendants' claims related to their connection with the property.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document provides further evidence supporting the defendants' claim over property.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document pertains to the settlement claims relevant to the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document relates to prior agreements on property partitioning among the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document helps strengthen the defendants' case regarding ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document contributes to the evidence of ownership by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report was used to assess the physical identification of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Partition of property
Case Code
Case between Nanu Arettummal vs Narayani Nellikunnummal et al regarding partition and separate possession
Case Code Year
Case between Nanu Arettummal vs Narayani Nellikunnummal et al regarding partition and separate possession