Baby v. Simi
Case brief
What is this about?
This Court accepted the Regular Second Appeal dismissing a challenge to lower court decrees. The judgment upheld the plaintiff's right of easement by grant over a 14-link pathway and affirmed that survey records do not determine title over title deeds.
What did the court decide?
The appeal was dismissed with no costs awarded.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 7TH BHADRA, 1944
RSA NO. 271 OF 2016
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTAS 34/2014 OF II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM OS 85/2011 OF I ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT,ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
BABY AGED 57 YEARS S/O.K.C.JACOB, KUPPAKKATTU HOUSE, IRUMPANAM, THRIPUNITHRA, ERANAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.DILEEP VARGHESE SMT.TESMY VARGHEESE
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINITIFF
SIMI AGED 37 YEARS W/O.ANOOP C.ALIYAS, CHANTYATHIL, PANDAPPILLY KARA, AARAKUZHA VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 686 672. BY ADVS. SRI.REJI GEORGE SMT.SIJI JOY
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the concurrent findings of fact by lower courts regarding the plaintiff's right of way over Plaint 'C' schedule property warrant interference in this Regular Second Appeal.
Whether the maxim 'falsa demonstratio non nocet' applies to limit the plaintiff's right of way based on conflicting descriptions of pathway width in title deeds.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Baby Aged 57 Years S/o.K.C.Jacob
- respondent
Simi Aged 37 Years W/o.Anoop C.
Coram
M.R. Anita
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court