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
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
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved his case with evidence presented and established that the boundary disputes raised by the defendant were unfounded.
The plaintiff proved his case with evidence presented and established that the boundary disputes raised by the defendant were unfounded.
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
Plaintiffs
Alikutty (71 years years)
Choorapulakkal House, Marakkara amsom
Defendants
Moideen @ Bava (35 years years)
Cheruvakkath House, Marakkara amsom & Post, Erkkara desom
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