Case Summary
Thaivalappil Nazer, the petitioner, filed for a final decree to partition property after a preliminary decree was made in his favor. Pathumma, the respondent, raised objections citing an appeal against the preliminary decree.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Final decree for partitioning property and payment for equalization of shares
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court passed a final decree to partition the property as per the Advocate Commissioner's report. Thaivalappil Nazer was required to pay Rs. 1,87,817 to Pathumma for equalization of shares.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The report from the Advocate Commissioner was accepted as equitable and both parties did not raise objections.
The report from the Advocate Commissioner was accepted as equitable and both parties did not raise objections.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The report from the Advocate Commissioner was accepted as equitable and both parties did not raise objections.
The report from the Advocate Commissioner was accepted as equitable and both parties did not raise objections.
Supporting Evidence
The Advocate Commissioner has divided the plaint schedule property in a most equitable manner and a final decree can be passed in terms of the said report and plans.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, a final decree is passed as follows: 1.That plot A shown as ABCDEFGH in green shade in Ext.C1(a) plan is allotted to the share of the respondent/ defendant. 2.That Plot B along with the residential house shown as DEFGHI in pink shade is allotted to the share of the plaintiff/final decree petitioner.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Thaivalappil Nazer
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Pathumma
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Commission report filed by Adv.MM Sreedevi, Commission plan filed by Adv.MM Sreedevi, Survey plan prepared by NJ Padmarajan, Surveyor
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- AJ Emmannual
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Dilkush VK
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Court
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Sreedevi.M.M
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Final decree to allot plots A and B to the respective parties.
Evidence:
In the result, a final decree is passed as follows: 1.That plot A shown as ABCDEFGH in green shade in Ext.C1(a) plan is allotted to the share of the respondent/ defendant. 2.That Plot B along with the residential house shown as DEFGHI in pink shade is allotted to the share of the plaintiff/final decree petitioner.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order for the final decree petitioner to pay an equalization amount to the respondent.
Evidence:
For equalization of share amount, the final decree petitioner shall pay Rs 1,87,817/- to the respondent and the property allotted to the petitioner shall be a charge for the said amount.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed by Adv.MM Sreedevi as part of the proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed by Adv.MM Sreedevi to illustrate the property division.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by NJ Padmarajan, Surveyor for the property division.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Thaivalappil Nazer vs Pathumma regarding final decree and partition of property
Case Code Year
Case between Thaivalappil Nazer vs Pathumma regarding final decree and partition of property