Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Baby @ Thomas and Mathew, are owners of certain properties that they claim are being surveyed by the defendants without their consent. They seek to restrain the defendants from taking such actions regarding their properties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendants are restrained from conducting survey otherwise in due process of law.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed that the defendants are restrained from conducting the survey of the plaintiff's properties, as the plaintiffs have established their ownership over those properties. However, this decree does not prevent government officials from conducting surveys in accordance with legal processes.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs established ownership over their properties.
Plaintiffs established ownership over their properties.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
In the light of the above discussion, it can be held that the plaintiff have established they have property comprised in field no.136.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The defendants are restrained from conducting survey otherwise in due process of law.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Baby @ Thomas
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mathew
- Party Age
- 95
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- District Collector, Kottayam
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thahasildar (LR), Kottayam Taluk
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney, Copy of Gift Deed no. 1882/1991, Copy of Sale Deed no. 745/1990, Tax Receipt, Notice (Form no. 4A)
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Raju Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P Vinodji
- Appearance Type
- Government Pleader
- Law Firm
- Addl. Govt. Pleader
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from conducting survey otherwise in due process of law.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained from conducting survey otherwise in due process of law.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed by the 1st plaintiff in favour of his son to represent him and to give evidence on his behalf.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Gift Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of gift deed allowing the 2nd plaintiff ownership of a specific property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed showing ownership of property by the 1st plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to tax payment for property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notices issued by the Special Tahasildar regarding acquisition of property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court exhibit containing the commission report relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Third Party Exhibit
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Documents related to Thandaper Kanakku of Ayarkunnam Village.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Baby @ Thomas et al vs District Collector, Kottayam et al regarding declaration and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Baby @ Thomas et al vs District Collector, Kottayam et al regarding declaration and injunction