Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Babu vs Smt.Pennamma
2021 Latest Caselaw 23391 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 23391 Ker
Judgement Date : 25 November, 2021

Kerala High Court
Babu vs Smt.Pennamma on 25 November, 2021
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
       Thursday, the 25th day of November 2021 / 4th Agrahayana, 1943
                     I.A 1/2021 IN RSA NO. 759 OF 2021
           AS 5/2019 OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT,THODUPUZHA.
                  OS 361/2014 OF MUNSIFF COURT,THODUPUZHA.
PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS:

  1. BABU AGED 55 YEARS S/O.KUTTAPPAN, PARASSERIL HOUSE, MUTTOM KARA,
     MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  2. RENJITH, AGED 37 YEARS S/O.MOHANAN, ARACKANDATHIL HOUSE, MUTTOM
     KARA, MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.

    BY ADVS.N.M.MOHAMED AYUB,JOHNSON JOSEPH KANADAN,
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

  1. SMT.PENNAMMA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS W/O.LATE GOPALAN, GOPI BHAVAN(H),
     ENANALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, AYAVANA P.O., PIN-686668.
  2. MR.GABEESH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O.LATE GOPALAN, GOPI BHAVAN(H),
     ENANALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, AYAVANA P.O., PIN-686668.
  3. SMT.GIBY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS D/O.LATE GOPALAN, GOPI BHAVAN(H),
     ENANALLOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, AYAVANA P.O., PIN-686668.
  4. JANSON MATHEW, ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O.N.J.MATHEW, MANAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
     MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  5. JISHNU P.A., ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O.ARJUNAN, PAREKATTIYIL HOUSE, MUTTOM
     VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  6. KAMALAKSHI, ABOUT 72 YEARS W/O.NARAYANA, SUMA VILASAM (H), MUTTOM
     VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  7. SHAMSUDEEN, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED, MURINGAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
     MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  8. RAHIM, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O.MAITHEEN, CHENGAMPALIL (H), MUTTOM
     VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
  9. JAYACHANDRAN P.J., AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS S/O.NOORNJAN, MANNAPARAMBIL
     (H), MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587,
     THODUPUZHA.
 10. SUNNY AUGUSTINE, ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O.AUGUSTHY, VICHATTU (H), MUTTOM
     VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
 11. K.G.SUDARSANAN, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O.UNNI, ARACKAKANDATHIL (H),
     MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
 12. A.D.JAYAN, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O.PACHAN, ARACKAKANDATHIL (H),
     MUTTOM VILLAGE, MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.
 13. N.SREEKUMARAN NAMBOOTHIRI, ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O.NEELAKANDAN,
     PUNNATHANANTHU MANA, SREEVALSAM(H), MUTTOM KARA, MUTTOM VILLAGE,
     MUTTOM P.O., PIN-685587, THODUPUZHA.

     This Regular second appeal having come up for orders on 25.11.2021,
the court on the same day passed the following:
                 N. ANIL KUMAR, J.
    -----------------------------------------
               RSA No. 759 of 2021
    -----------------------------------------
    Dated this the 25th day of November, 2021



                           ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants.

2. This RSA is admitted on the following

substantial questions of law;

(1) Since the appellants are not parties

to Ext.B1 suit, whether the courts below

erred in non suiting the appellants relying

on Ext.B3 judgment, which is only an

interparte judgment?

(2) Whether Ext.B3 judgment is admissible

in view of Sections 40 to 43 of the Indian

Evidence Act?

(3) Whether Ext.B5 final report filed

under Section 173(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure is admissible in a civil

suit and can be relied upon to decide the RSA No. 759 of 2021

..2..

civil case?

(4) Since existence of plaint D schedule

pathway is evident from Ext.A1 sale deed,

whether the courts below were justified in

holding that plaint D schedule pathway is

formed only in 2007?

(5) Whether the existence of alternative

pathway negatives the claim of public way

formed by dedication?

Issue notice.

IA No. 1 of 2021

Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioners/appellants.

2. The appellants and the respondents are

directed to maintain status quo as reported by

the Commissioner in Exts.C1 & C1(a), for a

period of three months.

Sd/-

N. ANIL KUMAR JUDGE bka/25.11.2021

25-11-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter