Case Summary
Ayisha filed a suit against Kadeejakkutty and others for the fixation of boundaries and injunction. A compromise was reached between the parties regarding the demolition of structures and construction of boundary walls.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Decree as per terms of compromise including demolition of structures and construction of boundary walls
Case Type
Civil Suit - Boundary Fixation and Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed based on a compromise reached by the parties regarding the fixation of boundaries and construction of a wall separating the properties.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Explain the main legal or evidentiary reason stated by the court for granting or refusing relief.
Explain the main legal or evidentiary reason stated by the court for granting or refusing relief.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Explain the main legal or evidentiary reason stated by the court for granting or refusing relief.
Explain the main legal or evidentiary reason stated by the court for granting or refusing relief.
Supporting Evidence
The suit is decreed as per the terms of compromise. Ext C1 and C2 dated 23/03/2017 shall form part of the decree.
Judgment Evidence:
Suit for fixation of boundary and injunction. Compromise IA.648/2018 is filed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ayisha
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- Daughter of Kunhimon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kadeejakkutty
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- Wife of Hamza
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hamza
- Party Age
- 60
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sidheek
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- Son of Hamza
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saleem
- Party Age
- 32
- Relation
- Son of Hamza
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Afsal
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- Son of Hamza
Plaintiffs Documents
Unknown
Defendants Documents
Unknown
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V. Chandrasekharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Vipin
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.A.M.Rafeek
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Decree as per terms of compromise including demolition of structures and construction of boundary walls
Evidence:
The suit is decreed as per the terms of compromise. Ext C1 and C2 dated 23/03/2017 shall form part of the decree.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit - Boundary Fixation and Injunction
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Boundary Dispute
Case Code
Case between Ayisha vs Kadeejakkutty et al regarding boundary fixation and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Ayisha vs Kadeejakkutty et al regarding boundary fixation and injunction