Prasad v. Remani
Case brief
What is this about?
In this second appeal against a decree in a suit for injunction and a subsequent registered will dispute, the High Court held that possession established by lower courts is a question of fact not open for review. The appeal was dismissed.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal was accordingly dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/15TH POUSHA, 1937
RSA.No. 1184 of 2015 (G)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN AS 142/2012 of ADDL. DISTRICT COURT - II, NORTH PARAVUR DATED 07-09-2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 241/2010 of MUNSIFF COURT, NORTH PARAVUR DATED 11-07-2012
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 1 &4:
1. PRASAD, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, THAIMACHEDATH HOUSE, PARAYAKAD MURI, PARAVUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. MURALI, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.LATE BHASKARAN, THAIMACHEDATH HOUSE, PARAYAKAD MURI, PARAVUR VILLAGE, PARAVUR TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SMT.MEGHA K.XAVIER
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the findings of fact by lower courts regarding possession of suit properties can be set aside in a second appeal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
PRASAD
- appellant
MURALI
- respondent
REMANI
- respondent
RADHAMANI
- respondent
JAYADEVAN
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court