Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 345 OF 2014

Case between Alikutty vs Moideen @ Bava regarding fixation of boundary

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR
Judge
Smt.SUSHAMA.P.
Order Date
2019-05-27
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves a boundary dispute between the plaintiff, Alikutty, and the defendant, Moideen @ Bava. The plaintiff claims that the defendant is making unnecessary claims on the eastern boundary of his property, leading to this suit for boundary fixation.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, fixing the boundary lines as proposed. The defendant was restrained from trespassing into the plaintiff's property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The boundary lines shown as A1B1 written in green ink in AB line in Ext. C4 plan are fixed as the boundaries demarcating the plaint schedule property and defendants property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, fixing the boundary lines as proposed. The defendant was restrained from trespassing into the plaintiff's property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved his case with evidence presented and established that the boundary disputes raised by the defendant were unfounded.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved his case with evidence presented and established that the boundary disputes raised by the defendant were unfounded.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence given by PW1 remains unchallenged. Evidence of PW1 coupled with Ext. A1, C1 to C4 plaintiff has proved his case.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. The boundary lines shown as A1B1 written in green ink in AB line in Ext. C4 plan are fixed as the boundaries demarcating the plaint schedule property and defendants property.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Alikutty
Party Age
71
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Moideen @ Bava
Party Age
35
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Partition Deed Doc. No.1603 of 1971.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. M.A.Ismail
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants and their men are restrained from tresspassing into plaintiffs' property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are hereby restrained by a perpetual injunction from tresspassing into Plaint schedule property, disturbing possession of the plaintiff and from committing any act of waste there in.
Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Boundary lines between the plaintiff’s and defendant’s property were fixed.
Evidence:
The boundary lines shown as A1B1 written in green ink in AB line in Ext. C4 plan are fixed as the boundaries demarcating the plaint schedule property and defendants property.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff entitled to realise the cost of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
Hence the plaintiff is entitled to realise the cost of the suit from the defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Title document of the plaintiff showing the property allotted to him.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report submitted by Advocate Commissioner detailing the property inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission plan submitted by Advocate Commissioner outlining the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Follow-up commission report submitted by Advocate Commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission plan showing the separation line between plaintiff's and defendant's property.
Reference:
Ext.C4

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Alikutty vs Moideen @ Bava regarding fixation of boundary
Case Code Year
Case between Alikutty vs Moideen @ Bava regarding fixation of boundary

Quick Facts

Location
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 05/01/2019 - 12:00
To
Sun, 05/31/2026 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Hamza vs Erattaparambil Hamza et al regarding petition allowance with costs
Munsiff Magistrate Court
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Mullanmadakkal Mammi vs Beeran Haji et al regarding petition on medical grounds
Court of the Munsiff Magistrate
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vettikkat Parikkuzhiyil Beerali vs Thayyil Kader Haji regarding unknown matter
Munsiff Magistrate Court
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between P.Damkumar vs Palakkavalappil Puthiyamaliyekkal Gulam Ali et al regarding default
Munsiff Magistrate Court
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Muhammed Thameem vs Muhammed Abdul Noor regarding Default Judgment
Munsiff Magistrate Court
Civil Suit Defendant Won