Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Thajudeen and his family, are seeking partition of property from the defendants, who are their relatives. The court dismissed the suit due to insufficient evidence and failure to amend the plaint.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for partition due to a lack of sufficient evidence to support their claims and the failure to amend the plaint. The plaintiffs were not entitled to any relief based on the evidence presented.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently establish their claims regarding the property and failed to provide necessary documentation.
The court found that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently establish their claims regarding the property and failed to provide necessary documentation.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently establish their claims regarding the property and failed to provide necessary documentation.
The court found that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently establish their claims regarding the property and failed to provide necessary documentation.
Supporting Evidence
Even though the defendants are exparte, the suit cannot be decreed in favour of the plaintiffs if they have purposefully withheld material facts from the Court.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result; the suit is dismissed. No costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Thajudeen
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Najeema Beevi. O
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Deena Beevi. N
- Party Age
- 31
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nadhi Beevi. N
- Party Age
- 28
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abdul Azeez
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sulfath Beevi
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shamna
- Party Age
- 24
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shibina
- Party Age
- 20
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of settlement deed No. 512/1977
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.G.T. Pradeep
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Induja Rajan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiffs requested partition of the property among the heirs.
Evidence:
In light of the discussions on the foregoing point, this court is of the view that the plaintiffs are not entitled to get any reliefs in their favour.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document serves as proof of the property division among the plaintiffs and the deceased's heirs.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report provides a commission's findings regarding the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The plan shows the divided portions of the property as per the commission's findings.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
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
2021