Suchetha v. Mini Kumari
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court allowed a review petition filed by a third party challenging the implication of a prior writ petition judgment which treated her as an exclusive owner of disputed property.
What did the court decide?
Review petition allowed; Writ Petition restored to file.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938 RP.No. 1095 of 2016 (T) IN WP(C).3156/2016 --------------------------------------------
AGAINST TO JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 3156/2016 DATED 27-01-2016 --------
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/3RD PARTY:
SUCHETHA.K, FW/O LATE PUSHPAGATHAN, AGED 70 YEARS, SANJU NIVAS, POONKAVU P.O, PATHIRAPALLY, ALAPPUZHA -688 001.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
SRI.DIPU JAMES SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
RESPONDENT(S)/ PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS:
1. MINI KUMARI.K, W/O MURUKEKSHAN P.P, AGED 55 YEARS, KUTTIPURATHU HOUSE, TUMBOLI P.O, ALAPPUZHA -688008.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a purchaser of a share of a co-ownership property is entitled to get the property demarcated.
Whether the earlier judgment disposing of the writ petition treated the petitioner as an exclusive owner, necessitating review.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
SUCHETHA.K
- respondent
MINI KUMARI.K
- respondent
THE TAHSILDAR
- respondent
VILLAGE OFFICER
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court