Antony Raj v. Michael
Case brief
What is this about?
In a second appeal regarding a partition suit compromise, the High Court of Kerala directed the trial court to allow appellants (alienees) to take possession of properties set apart to their assignors, confirming the final decree to avoid prejudice.
What did the court decide?
Directed trial court to allow appellants (alienees) to take possession of properties set apart to shares of their assignors; final decree confirmed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
TUESDAY, THE 22ND JUNE 2010 / 1ST ASHADHA 1932
SA.No. 892 of 1995(F)
-----------------------------AS.180/1993 of DISTRICT COURT, PALAKKAD OS.40/1974 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, PALAKKAD
APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS 3 AND 4/ RESPONDENTS 18 & 22
------------------------
1. ANTONI RAJ, S/O. ALBUTHASWAMY, CANALPIRIVU, PAMPAMPALLAM POST.
2. S.JOSEPH, S/O. SAVARIAR, CANALPIRIVU, PAMPAMPALLAM POST.
BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the properties set apart to sharers who had alienated properties to the appellants should be allowed to be taken possession of by the appellants in the final decree proceedings?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Antoni Raj and Ors.
- respondent
Michael, Central Excise Officer
- respondent
Thobias
- respondent
Arul Joseph
- respondent
Arokiaswamy
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court