Narayani v. Sugunan
Case brief
What is this about?
This was an appeal against a final decree denying a provision for water access from a well that does not belong to the appellants. The High Court dismissed the appeal, rejecting the plea as untenable, unlawful, and subject to an enormous uncondonable delay.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JULY 2015/12TH ASHADHA, 1937
FAO.No. 353 of 2012 ()
AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.6609/2011 & 6610/2011 IN I.A.2882/1999 IN OS 988/1992 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR DATED
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1,4 & 6 :
1. NARAYANI W/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI, KUNNATHUKARAYIL OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR.
2. SUBASH S/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI, KUNNATHUKARAYIL OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR.
3. SUJANAN S/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI, KUNNATHUKARAYIL OLLUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can grant a provision for water access as a legal right or easement at the final decree stage when no claim was made during the preliminary decree stage.
Whether the delay of over ten years in filing the plea for water access warrant condonation.
Whether a legal right to use a private well during partition should have been claimed at the preliminary decree stage as a legal right or easement.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
NARAYANI W/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI
- appellant
SUBASH S/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI
- appellant
SUJANAN S/O. LATE PARAYIL UNNI
- respondent
SUGUNAN S/O. PARAYIL UNNI
- respondent
SURESH S/O. PARAYIL UNNI
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court