Ally v. Sankunni
Case brief
What is this about?
This second appeal challenged a partition decree. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the lower courts properly appreciated evidence regarding property title and identification, rendering no substantial question of law for decision.
What did the court decide?
Second Appeal dismissed in limine. Interlocutory Application dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1931
RSA.NO. 55 OF 2010()
------------------------------AS.180/2009 OF ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, N. PARAVUR OS.519/1998 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ALUVA
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS IN A.S/DEFENDANTS 1 TO 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ALLY, AGED 65 YEARS, D/O.BHASKARAN AND W/O.NEELAKANTAN, RESIDING AT AJITHA NIVAS, KUMARANELLOOR P.O., NEAR KUMARANELLOOR TEMPLE, KOTTAYAM.
2. LEELA, AGED 61 YEARS, D/O.BHASKARAN AND W/O.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KAVANATTU VEEDU, MADHUPPADA BHAGAM,
KOOPARA, KOTTAYAM.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether refusal to grant declaration regarding title affects the right to seek partition.
Whether property was properly identified absent measurement under old survey numbers.
Whether findings of lower courts on appreciation of evidence are sustainable.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
ALLY
- appellant
LEELA
- appellant
RAVI
- appellant
LALITHA
- appellant
DEVI
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court