Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Abraham Philipose and Mariyamma Abraham, are seeking an injunction against the defendants, John Mathyas, George Mathyas, and Jerin Mathyas, who are obstructing their use of a road. The case involves disputes over property boundary and easement rights.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants shall not cause obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.2 road.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed that the defendants shall not cause obstruction to the plaintiffs' use of the road.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs have established title over the plaint schedule road and the defendants have a right of easement.
The plaintiffs have established title over the plaint schedule road and the defendants have a right of easement.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
On an overall analysis of the evidence on record, it is clear that the plaintiffs have title over the plaint schedule road.
Judgment Evidence:
OS 824/2015 is decreed as follows; The defendants shall not cause obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.2 road.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Abraham Philipose
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mariyamma Abraham
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- John Mathyas
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- George Mathyas
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jerin Mathyas
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of sale deed No.1593/1985, Copy of sale deed No.1592/1985, Tax receipt
Defendants Documents
Copy of Survey Map, Tax receipt, Copy of sale deed No.2909/1983, Order (Subject to objection)
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv.Karjet Koduvath
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv.A.J.Dominic
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv.K.Karjet
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Decree of permanent prohibitory injunction preventing defendants from obstructing use of the plaint schedule item no.2 road.
Evidence:
The defendants shall not cause obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.2 road.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
Decree to fix the boundary of the plaint schedule item no.1 property.
Evidence:
The said prayer cannot be allowed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no.1593/1985 establishing the plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no.1592/1985 establishing the second plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt evidencing the plaintiffs paying tax for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no.2909/1983 establishing the defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Tax receipt evidencing the defendants paying tax for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Property Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan prepared based on the title deeds for the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Abraham Philipose et al vs John Mathyas et al regarding injunction and fixation of boundary
Case Code Year
Case between Abraham Philipose et al vs John Mathyas et al regarding injunction and fixation of boundary