Lalitha v. Raghavan
Case brief
What is this about?
Second appeal against a decree in a property dispute. The appellants challenged the validity of a gift deed alleging undue influence and non-acceptance. The court held the gift was valid, possession passed, and no substantial question of law arose, dismissing the appeal.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933
SA.No. 914 of 2000(A)
------------------------------AS.50/1998 of DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR OS.59/1996 of MUNSIFF COURT,CHAVAKKAD
APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS
---------------------------------------------------------------
1. LALITHA, W/O.MACHINGAL PRABHAKARAN, CHAVAKKAD AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD.
2. RAINAS, S/O. MACHINGAL PRABHAKARAN, CHAVAKKAD AMSOM, DESOM, CHAVAKKAD.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Can Exhibit A1 be termed as a valid gift in the absence of any evidence of acceptance by the plaintiff?
Is oral evidence against the registered cancellation deed hit by Section 91 and 92 of the Evidence Act?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Lalitha
- appellant
Raines
- respondent
Raghavan
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court