Joseph v. Mariamma
Case brief
What is this about?
This Second Appeal against a decision of the Sub Court of Thiruvalla was dismissed in limine. The High Court found that no question of law arose as proceedings were based on valid title unchallenged by limitation or adverse possession claims.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930
RSA.No. 655 of 2008() --------------------AS.3/2003 of SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA
APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS
- JOSEPH @ KUTTAPPAN, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.LATE SRI.MATHAI, PEEDIKAPARAMPIL HOUSE, KURIYANNOOR P.O., THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
- SANTHAMMA, D/O.MATHAI, AGED 62 YEARS, DO.
- DAVID MATHAI, S/O.MATHAI, AGED 60 YEARS, DO.
- MARY, W/O.LATE BABY MATHAI, DO.
- LIJO P.MATHEW, 30 YEARS, S/O.LATE BABY MATHAI, DO.
- BINOY P.BABY, 28 YEARS, D/O.LATE BABY MATHAI, DO.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a declaration of title and recovery of possession can be maintained in the facts and circumstances of the case without a plea of adverse possession or limitation.
Whether substantial questions of law arise for consideration in this Second Appeal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
JOSEPH @ KUTTAPPAN
- appellant
SANTHAMMA
- appellant
DAVID MATHAI
- appellant
MARY
- appellant
LIJO P.MATHEW
- appellant
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court