Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
OS.09/2025

Case between Aneesha vs Lissy George et al regarding property dispute and interim injunction.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Sumey Chandran
Order Date
2025-06-19
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Aneesha is the petitioner alleging unlawful obstruction by Lissy George and George regarding access to her property. The case involves a dispute over a pathway and the removal of soil affecting her property rights.

Judgment Outcome

Partial Relief
Interim Order
The petition for an interim injunction was partially allowed, with the court declining the prayer for injunction concerning the B schedule pathway but maintaining status quo. The respondents were restrained from removing soil beyond a certain area.
Judgment Favored
Partial
Relief Granted
Case Type
Interlocutory Application
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner did not establish a prima facie right over the B schedule pathway.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed in part as follows: 1. The prayer for injunction in respect of the B schedule pathway is declined at this stage. However both sides are directed to keep status quo with respect to B schedule pathway.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Aneesha (Age not specified years) Parappayil Kalangattu House, Airapuram P O, Airapuram Kara, Airapuram Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pin: 683 541.

Defendants

Lissy George (Age not specified years) Irumbanathu House, Airapuram P O, Airapuram Kara, Airapuram Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pin: 683 541. George (Age not specified years) Irumbanathu House, Airapuram P O, Airapuram Kara, Airapuram Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk, Ernakulam District, Pin: 683 541.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Partly Granted
Description:
Petitioner sought an injunction against respondents for obstructing the usage of the B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
The prayer for injunction in respect of the B schedule pathway is declined at this stage.
Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petitioner sought to restrain respondents from removing soil from the northern boundary.
Evidence:
The respondents are hereby restrained from removing any soil beyond the narrow strip already set aside on the northern side of the respondents’ property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Claim of ownership and access rights to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supporting evidence of property taxes paid by the petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another piece of evidence regarding property tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Police Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence regarding complaints made by the petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Background information on the property and ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Photographs and CD
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Visual evidence submitted to support the petitioner's claims.
Reference:
Ext.A6 series
Document Type: Commission Report and Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Court's own examination report that provides insights into the property layout.
Reference:
Ext.C1, C1(a)

Quick Facts

Location
Perumbavoor
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases