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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 6/1997

Case between S Abdul Razzak vs C B Suraja Devi et al regarding Review of commission report

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany.
Order Date
2025-03-13
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves a review petition filed by S Abdul Razzak against C B Suraja Devi and V P Omkumar regarding the validity of a commission report related to property measurements. The court dismissed the review petition, stating there were no errors apparent on the face of the record.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The review petition was dismissed by the court as there were no apparent mistakes in the previous judgment. The court emphasized that the review process does not allow for a rehearing of the entire matter.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Review Petition
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The court found no apparent errors in the previous order that warranted a review.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, review petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

S Abdul Razzak (74 years) 44/1257A Kaloor, Elamkulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Kochi- 682017

Defendants

C B Suraja Devi (62 years) House No. 27, ACSRA, Panackal House, Lane-2, A C S Road, Kaloor, Kochi- 682017 V P Omkumar (71 years) House No.27, ACSRA, Panackal House, Lane-2, A C S Road, Kaloor, Kochi- 682017

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The review petition sought to set aside the previous order regarding the commission report.
Evidence:
Therefore, this Court finds that there is no error apparent on the face of record to review the order in IA 1/2024.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
These documents were part of the review petition, concerning the commission's findings related to property measurements.
Reference:
Exts C4 and C4(a)
Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced as the basis for measuring properties in the context of the review petition.
Reference:
Ext A1
Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was also referenced as part of the basis for measuring properties in the review petition.
Reference:
Ext A3
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
These documents were initially filed and formed part of the history of the proceedings leading up to the review.
Reference:
Exts C3 and C3(a)

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Wed, 01/01/1997 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases