Case Summary
Rajappan filed a suit against MuraleedharanNair and others for declaration of his rights over certain properties and to restrain them from trespassing. The defendants contested the allegations and denied the claims made by the plaintiff.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule item no.1 property having an extent of 1.24¼ acres.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in part, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the property claimed by the plaintiff and fixing the boundary of the property. The suit was partially allowed.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved possession and ownership of the property through sale deed.
The plaintiff proved possession and ownership of the property through sale deed.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved possession and ownership of the property through sale deed.
The plaintiff proved possession and ownership of the property through sale deed.
Supporting Evidence
Considering the recital in Exhibit A1, the property identified by the Advocate Commissioner as 'MLKOEN' would be the property as mentioned in Exhibit A4.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, O.S. 762/2014 is decreed in part, as follows; The defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule item no.1 property having an extent of 1.24¼ acres as stated in Exhibit A1 and an extent of 20 cents in Exhibit A7.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajappan
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- MuraleedharanNair
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jayasree
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prameelakumari
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M.K. Purushothaman Nair
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Gouriamma
- Party Age
- 79
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Sale Deed No. 2066/1995, Copy of Partition Deed No. 823/1994, Copy of Sale Deed No. 823/1994, Copy of Sale Deed No. 1136/1984, Settlement Deed No. 1857/1995, Thandapper Number by Village Officer, Kooroppada, Copy of Sale Deed No. 2065/1995
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.A. Bhadran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nitheesh S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anil D. Kartha
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Raju Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
The plaintiff sought a declaration of title over the property.
Evidence:
The prayer to declare that the plaintiff has title over 1.34¼ acres of land cannot be allowed. By Exhibit A1, only 1.24¼ acres of land was in existence.
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff requested to restrain the defendants from trespassing into the property.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule item no.1 property.
Relief Type:
Boundary Fixation
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff sought fixation of the property boundary.
Evidence:
The boundary of the plaint schedule item no.1 is fixed through line ‘ML’ and ‘LO’.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The Sale Deed establishes the plaintiff's title to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is related to property transactions affecting the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Relevant to the ownership claims over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document is cited as being related to a void title claim against the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document relates to property being contested in the case.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Defines the ownership of other adjoining properties related to this case.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report assists in determining the boundaries of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The plan illustrates the identified lines pertaining to the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This is related to earlier measurements and property assessments.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrative aids to determine property dimensions in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Thandapper Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Documents pertaining to the society's establishment and property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type:
Byelaw
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Related to regulatory frameworks governing the society.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Document Type:
Thandapper Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Historical property records supporting claims.
Reference:
Ext.X3
Document Type:
Land Mutation Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Records related to mutation and ownership changes of properties.
Reference:
Ext.X4
Document Type:
Thandapper Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Additional evidential context regarding property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.X5
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Fraudulent property transfer
Case Code
Case between Rajappan vs MuraleedharanNair et al regarding declaration and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Rajappan vs MuraleedharanNair et al regarding declaration and injunction