Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 335/2019

Case between Philomina V.J. vs Kochu Tresia regarding Partition and injunction

Court
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2024-11-30
Duration
approximately-5 years 16 days
Case Closed
Sat, 11/30/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Philomina V.J. and Rose Angel, are seeking a partition of a property inherited from their deceased father, V.P. Joseph. The defendants, including Kochu Tresia, contest the plaintiffs' claims of ownership and have filed a written statement in defense.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit for partition is decreed, and a preliminary decree for partition is passed, allowing the plaintiffs to receive 4/15th of the property. The defendants are entitled to the remaining shares, with an injunction against the first two defendants from alienating their shares.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Preliminary decree for partition and permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit for partition is decreed, and a preliminary decree for partition is passed, allowing the plaintiffs to receive 4/15th of the property. The defendants are entitled to the remaining shares, with an injunction against the first two defendants from alienating their shares.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs' evidence was unrebutted and established their case for partition.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs' evidence was unrebutted and established their case for partition.
Supporting Evidence
The unrebutted oral testimony of PW1 and A1 established her case as pleaded by her. In the absence of any countervailing evidence to contradict this proof of plaint claim.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed and a preliminary decree for partition is passed as follows: 1. The plaint schedule property shall be divided by metes and bounds into 15 equal shares and allot 4/15th shares to the plaintiffs by actual division and separation.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Philomina V.J.
Party Age
56
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Rose Angel
Party Age
60
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kochu Tresia
Party Age
86
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Tresa Shiny
Party Age
47
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mary Wilson
Party Age
53
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Antony
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of certificate of purchase of kudikidappu obtained under the Right to Information Act
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
N.C. Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.P. Rexy
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Antony Joseph
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Rani George
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Adam Ambrose
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Annie George
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Partition
Outcome: Granted
Description:
A preliminary decree for partition of the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed and a preliminary decree for partition is passed as follows: 1. The plaint schedule property shall be divided by metes and bounds into 15 equal shares and allot 4/15th shares to the plaintiffs by actual division and separation.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from alienating, encumbering or committing waste over the shares allotted to the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 from alienating, encumbering or committing waste over the shares allotted to the plaintiffs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Certified copy of certificate of purchase of Kudikidappu
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Accepted and marked in evidence to establish the plaint claim.
Reference:
Ext.A1

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 Philomina V.J. vs Kochu Tresia regarding Partition and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Philomina V.J. vs Kochu Tresia regarding Partition and injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Sat, 11/30/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 11/30/2024 - 12:00
From
Fri, 11/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sat, 11/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Mini Jolly vs Noel et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Jobin Thomas vs Thrikkakara Municipality et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between His Holiness Shrimad Raghavendra Thirtha Swami et al vs Venkatesh Shenoy et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Santhosh P @ Santhoshkumar vs Suresh P.S, Mallika Shanmughan regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kochuthressia Thomas vs Gopalan, Kalidasan regarding recovery of possession and injunction.
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Defendant Won