Case Summary
This case involves plaintiffs seeking a partition of property that was previously subject to a preliminary decree. The court ultimately passed a final decree for the allotment of property shares to the plaintiffs.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the final decree application for partitioning the property and allocated specific shares to the plaintiffs as per the preliminary decree.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The advocate commissioner's report was accepted by the court, which indicated that the partition was done equitably and as per the preliminary decree.
The advocate commissioner's report was accepted by the court, which indicated that the partition was done equitably and as per the preliminary decree.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The advocate commissioner's report was accepted by the court, which indicated that the partition was done equitably and as per the preliminary decree.
The advocate commissioner's report was accepted by the court, which indicated that the partition was done equitably and as per the preliminary decree.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs have no objection in the commission report and plan submitted by the advocate commissioner. It is satisfied that the advocate commissioner has effected the partition in an equitable manner and on the basis of preliminary decree.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, Final Decree application is allowed and final decree is passed as follows: 1) The decree schedule property item No.1 property is having a total extent of 10 cents as shown in Ext.C1(a) plan with letters ‘ABCDA’. 2) The plot having an extent of 250 Sq. links as shown in Ext.C1(a) plan with letters ‘EFGC’ is allotted to 1/12th share of petitioners.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Subha Lekshmi
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- R.T.Rajalekshmi
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- R.T.Kalaivani
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- R.T.Nagarajan
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- R.T.Babu
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Lekshmi Ammal
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kumaraswami
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Swarnammal
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Raveendran
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Bhanumathi
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Affidavit in support of the application, commission report, plan and expert engineer report.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. R.Satheesh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Final decree application is allowed and final decree is passed for the allotment of respective shares to the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
In the result, Final Decree application is allowed and final decree is passed as follows: The decree schedule property item No.1 property is having a total extent of 10 cents as shown in Ext.C1(a) plan with letters ‘ABCDA’. The plot having an extent of 250 Sq. links as shown in Ext.C1(a) plan with letters ‘EFGC’ is allotted to 1/12th share of petitioners.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The commission report details the measurement and allocation of shares in the plaint schedule property as per the preliminary decree.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The plan shows the divisions and respective shares of the plaintiffs in the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Subha Lekshmi et al vs Lekshmi Ammal et al regarding partition of property
Case Code Year
Case between Subha Lekshmi et al vs Lekshmi Ammal et al regarding partition of property