Dismissed

Aminu v. Hussan

Kerala HC8 Jan 2014OP(C)/65/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court was seized of O.P.(C) No. 65 of 2014, an application for issuance of a commission in an underlying suit for cancellation and partition. The High Court ruled that as the suit is for cancelling a partition deed to which the petitioner is a party, identification of the property is not currently germane. No interim order is passed to impede the trial. The ma

What did the court decide?

The application for issuance of a commission is dismissed subject to the trial court's discretion to issue one during trial if clarification is required.

Aminu Vs Hussan — Partition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014/18TH POUSHA, 1935

¶5

OP(C).No. 65 of 2014 (O)

¶6

IN OS 217/2010 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT TIRUR

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:

¶8

AMINU, AGED 46 YEARS

¶9

W/O.ABDULLA, D/O.MUTHUVATTIL MOIDEEN, VETTICHIRA AMSOM PUNNATHALA DESOM, POST KADAMPUZHA, TIRUR TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

¶12

1. HUSSAN,

¶13

S/O.MUTHUVATTIL MOIDEEN, KALPAKANCHERRY AMSOM DESOM POST KALPAKANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶14

2. KADIYAMU,

¶15

W/O.MOIDEEN, POKKATTU HOUSE, POST KALPAKANCHERRY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶16

3. SAINABA,

¶17

W/O.MOHAMMEDKUTTY, MACHINCHERRY THOOMBIL P.O.THINDALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶18

4. NAFEESA, W/O.MANU, POTTACHOLA, PAZHUR AMSOM DESOM PAZHUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶19

5. THAYIMU,

¶20

W/O.ABHAS, MURUKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, POST MAYYERICHIRA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶21

6. SAMEERA,

¶22

W/O.CHATHANATTIL MOIDEENKUTTY KALPAKANCHERRY AMSOM DESOM, POST KALPAKANCHERRY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676551.

¶23

THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

OP(C).No. 65 of 2014 (O)

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶27

EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 30.7.2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR.

¶28

EXT.P2: COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 30.7.2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR DATED 4.3.2011.

¶29

EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF I.A.1838/2011 IN O.S.217/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR DATED 1.9.2011.

¶30

EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COUNTER IN I.A.1838/2011 IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 22.10.2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR.

¶31

EXT.P5: COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT IN I.A.1838/2011 IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 3.9.2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR.

¶32

EXT.P6: COPY OF THE I.A.2310/2012 IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 24.9.2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR.

¶33

EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.2310/2012 IN O.S.217/2010 DATED 21.10.2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, TIRUR.

¶34

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

// true copy //

PA to Judge

das

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶39

========================== O.P.(C). No. 65 of 2014

¶40

=================================== Dated this the 8^th day of January, 2014

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The plaintiff in a suit for cancellation of partition deed and also for partition of the property is the petitioner. The request for issuance of commission was turned down by the learned Munsiff. Reasons have been stated therein. There is already a report filed by the advocate commissioner. The question of identity of the property may not be so much germane for consideration since the suit itself is for cancellation of a partition deed to which she is also a party. The suit is actually posted for trial in the special list, it is stated. If for any reason during the trial or after the trial the learned Munsiff feels that any clarification is required then it is open to the learned Munsiff to issue a commission but not otherwise. At this stage, I am not inclined to pass any interim order which will impede the trial of the suit.

¶43

-: 2 :-

¶44

O.P.(C).No.65 of 2014

¶45

The trial court will dispose of the suit untrammeled by any of the observations made by that court in the impugned order.

¶46

The OP(C) is dismissed subject to what is stated above. Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶47

das

Aminu v. Hussan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aminu v. Hussan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Oil Corporatiion Ltd. Vs Biju K. Joseph

Leelamma Vs Mary

Pradeep Kumar G Vs Bindu Lakshman

Sumangala Vs Kunju Mol

M/S.Ansal Buildwell Limited Vs Garden View Apartment Owners Association

B.Surendra Das Vs Wilson