Anirudhan v. M.J.Mathew
Case brief
What is this about?
Held that the second appeal by the defendant against the trial court and first appellate court decrees in a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession lacks merit and is dismissed without costs.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed. No costs.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2019 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1941
SA.No. 532 of 2002
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.05.2002 IN AS 81/1995 of SUB COURT, CHERTHALA
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.03.1995 IN OS 807/1992 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA
APPELLANT/2ND APPELLANT - 2ND DEFENDANT:
ANIRUDHAN, S/O KANNAN, PANDARAPPATTATHIL, THURAVOOR PANCHAYAT WARD NO.4,, THEKKUM MURI, THURAVOOR THEKKU VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP
RESPONDENTS/1ST RESPONDENT-PLAINTIFF & APPELLANTS & DEFENDANTS 1 TO 3:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the second appeal against the concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court in title and possession dispute deserves dismissal.
Whether the claim of reclamation of disputed land by the defendant lacks merit given clear survey plans.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Anirudhan, S/o Kannan, Pandarappattathil, Thuravoor Panchayat Ward No.4, Thekkum Muri, Thuravoor Thekku Village
- respondent
M.J.Matthew, Chaliyil, Valamangalam Thekkum Muri, Thuravoor Thekku Village
- respondent
Ponnappan, S/o. Kannan Pandarappattathil, Thuravoor Panchayat Ward No.4, Thekkum Muri, Thuravoor Thekku Village
- respondent
Chachu, W/o. Anirudhan of Do. Do.
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court