Case Summary
The case involves petitioners Selvaraj and Leela challenging the Commission Report filed by the Advocate Commissioner. The defendants are Gopakumar and Sreekumar, and both parties objected to the report's vagueness.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decided not to set aside the Commission Report and instead remitted it back to the Advocate Commissioner for further action. A specific direction was given to ascertain the matters properly.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The report was not found to contain grave errors, thus the commission report is remitted for further clarification.
The report was not found to contain grave errors, thus the commission report is remitted for further clarification.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Having considered the Commission Report filed by Advocate Commissioner, both parties filed objection stating that the commission report is vague and certain matters are not specifically ascertained.
Judgment Evidence:
That being so. I don’t find reason to set aside commission report instead commission report is remitted back to Advocate Commissioner to report the matter sought in the present application with a specific direction to Advocate Commissioner and Surveyor to ascertain all the matter is properly and to file commission report.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Selvaraj
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Leela
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Gopakumar
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sreekumar
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.N.Krishnaprasad
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.L.Narasimhan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Pamila.M.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Deepak Varghese Mathew
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Geethu Susan Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv.S.S.Balu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
Request to set aside the Commission Report was not granted, but the report was remitted back with specific directions.
Evidence:
I don’t find reason to set aside commission report instead commission report is remitted back to Advocate Commissioner to report the matter sought in the present application.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This document was filed by the Advocate Commissioner and was subject to objections by both parties questioning its vagueness.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2020