O.S. No. 725/2022

Case between Anitha Kumari K.G et al vs Unnikrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court

THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM

Judge

SMT REEJA R. NAIR

Order Date

2025-04-10

Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)

Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Anitha Kumari K.G and Anil Kumar K.G, are seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the first defendant, Unnikrishnan, related to a goat shed operating unlawfully nearby. They claim the shed has caused severe air and water pollution, affecting their health and living conditions.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won

Interim Order

The petition for a permanent prohibitory injunction was dismissed by the court. The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish a prima-facie case or demonstrate irreparable injury to warrant the injunction.

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to establish a prima-facie case in support of their claim for an interim injunction.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Anitha Kumari K.G (47 years) Kavaraparambil House 6/607, Tripunithura Municpality, Irumpanam P.O., Pin 682 309 Anil Kumar K.G (48 years) Kavaraparambil House 6/607, Tripunithura Municpality, Irumpanam P.Q., Pin 682 309

Defendants

Unnikrishnan (52 years) VettikkavuparambuVeedu, Kavaraparambil House 6/608, Tripunithura Municpality, Irumpanam P.O., Pin 682 309 The Tripunithura Municipality (Age not specified years) Tripunithura Municipal Office, Tripunithura - 682 301 The Kerala State Pollution Control Board (Age not specified years) Regional Office, Kadavanthra, Cochin - 20, Ernakulam

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction

Outcome: Refused

Description:

The plaintiffs prayed for a permanent prohibitory injunction against the first defendant from operating a goat shed on the adjacent property.

Evidence:

In the light of the facts and circumstances as discussed above, this court is of the view that prima facie case does not exists in favour of the plaintiffs. Thus, no irreparable injury will be caused to the plaintiffs, if the petition is not allowed. Balance of convenience in this regard is also seen not in favour of the plaintiffs. Hence in the light of above facts and circumstances, point Nos. 1 to 4 are found against the plaintiffs and it is answered accordingly.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commissioner Report

Submitted By: Court

Relevance:

The court referred to the commissioner report to establish the conditions of the goat shed and the number of goats present, which were crucial for determining the prima facie case.

Reference:

Ext.C1