V.K.Venu v. Rajan
Case brief
What is this about?
This order allows the original petition challenging the dismissal of applications to implead a third defendant and amend plaint in a suit for partition. The court held that the alienee of the co-ownership property must be impleaded.
What did the court decide?
The original petition is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. The applications to implead and amend are allowed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/29TH MAGHA, 1937
OP(C).No. 1531 of 2015 (O)
ORDER DATED 20.6.2015 IN IA 1444/2015 AND 1443/2015 IN OS 31/2014 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF I, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER(S)/PLAINTIFFS:
1. V.K.VENU, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN CHETTIYAR, VADAKE KARAADI HOUSE, P.O.THAMARASSERY, RAROTH AMSOM, VEZHUPOOR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN-673 573.
2. PARUKUTTY,
AGED 69 YEARS, W/O.V.K.GOPALAN, 'PRIYA', B.G. ROAD, KATCHERI AMSOM DESOM, P.O.NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE TALUK, PIN-673 011.
3. PRADEEPAN,
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applications to implead a third defendant and amend the plaint should have been allowed in a partition suit.
Whether the лицами of an alienee should be impleaded when alienation is alleged as not binding.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
V.K.VENU
- respondent
RAJAN
Coram
K ABRAHAM MATHEW
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court