Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 493/2022

Case between Rekha P.G vs Raji Dileep Kumar et al regarding partition of property.

Court
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi K Dinamany
Order Date
2025-04-03
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Rekha P.G, is seeking a partition of ancestral property against defendants Raji Dileep Kumar and Vijayalakshmi P.S. The plaintiff argues that she has a birthright to the property as a co-owner, while the defendants contest her claims.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit for partition, granting the plaintiff and defendants each a share of the property. The property will be partitioned into three equal shares.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Partition of plaint schedule property by metes and bounds into 3 equal shares.
Case Type
Partition Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaint schedule property is partible and that the plaintiff has a rightful claim as a co-owner.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed and a preliminary decree of partition is passed as given under: 1) Plaint schedule property is ordered to be partitioned by metes and bounds into 3 equal shares. 2) Plaintiff is entitled for 1/3 rd share in plaint schedule property. 3) Defendants are entitled for 1/3ʳᵈ share each in plaint schedule property.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Rekha P.G (48 years years) Arackal house, Poolani, Melur P.O, Chalakudy - 680 311.

Defendants

Raji Dileep Kumar (57 years years) Gokulam, Udayamperoor P.O, Ernakulam, Pin - 682 307. Vijayalakshmi P.S (79 years years) 19/127, Kizhakke Parangott house, Udayamperoor P.O, Ernakulam, Pin - 682 307.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to a 1/3rd share in the partitioned property.
Evidence:
The court is satisfied that plaint schedule property is liable to be partitioned between the parties. Plaintiff and defendants are entitled for 1/3ʳᵈ share each in plaint schedule property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This deed established the initial partition of the ancestral properties among the members of the Kizhakke Parangott Nair Tharavadu.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This deed details the sale of 12 cents of the property, highlighting the plaintiff's name inclusion as required by the purchaser.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice demanded partition into three equal shares, evidencing the plaintiff's intent to seek legal remedies.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This card serves as proof of delivery of the lawyer's notice to the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This card serves as proof of delivery of the lawyer's notice to the second defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice from Adv. Prakash P George affirms the plaintiff's co-ownership and willingness to partition.
Reference:
Ext.A6

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases