V.K.A Rahim v. Ian D Cruz
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal by defendant against order quashing earlier dismissal in boundary suit. Held: Unwarranted observations on defendant's title deleted. Order of remand to trial court preserved; appeal dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Deletion of unwarranted observations on defendant's title; remand order upheld; appeal dismissed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 1st DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
FAO (RO) NO. 232 OF 2016
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.06.2014 IN OS No. 234/2011
OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.03.2016 IN AS No.42/2014 OF II
ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:
V.K.A RAHIM, RESIDING AT SARGAM HOUSE, AGED 69 YEARS, WATER LAND ROAD, KOCHI-682 020.
BY ADVS. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT.ASHA BABU SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR SRI.S.M.PRASANTH SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR SR.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the observation by the first appellate court regarding the defendant's title was unwarranted and should be deleted.
Whether the first appellate court's order of remand in a suit for fixation of boundary deserves interference despite legal observations.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
V.K.A Rahim
- respondent
Ian D'Cruz
- respondent
Minju Janet George
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court