Nirmala v. Vijayaraj
Case brief
What is this about?
This civil revision order affirmed the lower courts' decree in a partition suit where the defendant failed to appear and explain a large delay. It clarified that assignees of co-owners can participate in auctions and the remainder claimant may seek auction if division is impossible.
What did the court decide?
The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.
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.CHITAMBARESH
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/22ND AGRAHAYANA 1934
CRP.No. 178 of 2012 ()
IA.NO.1518/2010 IN OS.331/2007 of MUSNIFF'S COURT,ADOOR CMA.1/2011 of DISTRICT COURT,PATHANAMTHITTA
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
NIRMALA, D/O.NARAYANI KALUNKU VATHUKKAL KIZHAKKECHERUVIL VEEDU KOODAL MURI,KOODAL VILLAGE,ADOOR TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.B.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S)/COUNTER PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS:
1. VIJAYARAJ,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition challenging an ex-parte partition decree should be allowed when the delay in applying to set aside the decree is excessive.
Whether the remaining co-owner is entitled to participate in the auction of the partitioned property in the ratio of her share.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Nirmala
- respondent
Vijayaraj
- respondent
Jithinraj
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court