Case Summary
The petitioner, Subaida, seeks a final decree for partition of property as per a preliminary decree granted in 2008. The case involves the division of property among legal heirs.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Final decree for partition granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for a final decree for partition, affirming the Advocate Commissioner's equitable division of property. The petitioner is to receive a larger share of the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The Advocate Commissioner's report supported the equitable division of property as sought by the petitioner.
The Advocate Commissioner's report supported the equitable division of property as sought by the petitioner.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The Advocate Commissioner's report supported the equitable division of property as sought by the petitioner.
The Advocate Commissioner's report supported the equitable division of property as sought by the petitioner.
Supporting Evidence
Advocate Commissioner reported that the property stated in the decree schedule is available for partition. Advocate Commissioner valued the property @ Rs. 5,000/- per cents for plot P and R. The total value of the property is Rs. 51,780/- and the Commissioner divided the property into 3 plots, which supported the final decree for partition.
Judgment Evidence:
The result, petition is allowed and a final decree for partition is passed as follows: (I) Property having an extent of 4.52 cents shown as Plot 'P' and property having an extent of 1.42 cents shown as Plot P1 in the Ext. C2 sketch are allotted to the 3/4th share of the petitioner in the decree schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Subaida
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ayisa Beevi
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Amina
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Commissioner's Report, Plan
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.A. Padmakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.K. Moosakutty
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. S. Hariharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Final decree for partition of property.
Evidence:
The result, petition is allowed and a final decree for partition is passed.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Respondent No.1 shall pay Rs. 4,405/- to the petitioner towards equalization of share.
Evidence:
Respondent No.1 shall pay Rs. 4,405/- to the petitioner towards equalization of share.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commissioner's Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report was used to effect division of the decree schedule property in an equitable manner.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The plan was referenced for allotting shares of the property in the final decree.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Subaida vs Ayisa Beevi et al regarding partition of property
Case Code Year
Case between Subaida vs Ayisa Beevi et al regarding partition of property