Vijayan v. Kuttappan
Case brief
What is this about?
This is a second appeal in a partition suit. The appellant challenged the lower courts' finding that co-ownership existed and that evidence of gift, exclusive ownership of a building, and ouster was insufficient. The High Court dismissed the appeal.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal was found to be without merits and was dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2011 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1933
SA.No. 69 of 2000(G)
------------------------------
AS.12/1993 of ADDL.SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA OS.1404/1991 of ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT,IRINJALAKUDA
APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT/DEFENDANT
-----------------------------------------------------------
VIJAYAN, S/O.KIZHUPPILLY KANDU, AGED 59 , VENDOOR DESOM, AMBALLUR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, TRICHUR.
BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN
SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.A.B.SUBIRE SRI.C.P.REJI SRI.T.N.SURESH SRI.T.K.ANIRUDHAN
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether basic tax receipts confer title of property to the payer?
Whether building tax assessment register is proof of ownership and occupation?
Whether plea of adverse possession can be pleaded together against a co-owner not in occupation?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
VIJAYAN
- respondent
KUTTAPPAN
- respondent
SUBADRA
- respondent
CHANDRIKA
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court