SAJANI P P vs P GEETHA — 350/2024
Case under --- Section SECTION26ORDERVIIRULE1. Status: call on. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLKN120005522024
Next Hearing
18th June 2026
e-Filing Number
29-08-2024
Filing Number
264/2024
Filing Date
03-09-2024
Registration No
350/2024
Registration Date
03-09-2024
Court
Additional Munsiffs Court Kannur
Judge
4-Addl. Munsiff/JFCM 5, Kannur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SAJANI P P
Adv. Balaram KK
Respondent(s)
P GEETHA
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Addl. Munsiff/JFCM 5, Kannur
call on
For commission report
For Counter in IA
For Counter in IA
For Counter in IA
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-05-2026 | call on |
| 21-03-2026 | For commission report |
| 16-03-2026 | For Counter in IA |
| 13-03-2026 | For Counter in IA |
| 20-02-2026 | For Counter in IA |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Sajani P P v. P Geetha (OS 350/2024) Outcome: Suit decreed with preliminary decree for property partition. The Munsiff Court of Kannur granted plaintiff Sajani P P's partition suit against defendants (P Geetha, P Anitha, P Vinod). The court found that a 1996 Will (Ext.A2) executed by the late P P Madhavi was genuine and valid, bequeathing 4 cents of property with house to plaintiff's father Dineshan and 4 cents to Revathi. The court rejected defendants' 1983 Will (Ext.B1) as they failed to produce attesting witnesses per succession law requirements. Plaintiff successfully proved testamentary capacity and proper execution through witness testimony and registered documentation. The 8-cent property shall be divided equally: plaintiff receives one 4-cent share with the house; defendants receive the other 4-cent share. Suit costs payable from estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Sajani P P v. P Geetha (OS 350/2024) Outcome: Suit decreed with preliminary decree for property partition. The Munsiff Court of Kannur granted plaintiff Sajani P P's partition suit against defendants (P Geetha, P Anitha, P Vinod). The court found that a 1996 Will (Ext.A2) executed by the late P P Madhavi was genuine and valid, bequeathing 4 cents of property with house to plaintiff's father Dineshan and 4 cents to Revathi. The court rejected defendants' 1983 Will (Ext.B1) as they failed to produce attesting witnesses per succession law requirements. Plaintiff successfully proved testamentary capacity and proper execution through witness testimony and registered documentation. The 8-cent property shall be divided equally: plaintiff receives one 4-cent share with the house; defendants receive the other 4-cent share. Suit costs payable from estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts