Case Summary
The plaintiff, Basheer M.K, is running a fish trade business and has filed a suit against the defendant V.H Samad and additional defendants to prevent them from illegally trespassing into the property. The defendants claimed no illegal action occurred.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the 1st defendant from trespassing and causing obstruction.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff's evidence proved that the 1st defendant attempted illegal trespass and obstruction of his business.
The plaintiff's evidence proved that the 1st defendant attempted illegal trespass and obstruction of his business.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed as follows: A) The 1st defendant and his men are restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property forcefully and to cause any kind of obstruction to the plaintiff to use the plaint schedule property for running the business of fish trade.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Basheer M.K (46 years)
Mekkath House, Chittettukara, C.S.E.Z P.O, Kakkanadu, Pin 682037
Defendants
V.H Samad (36 years)
Varanattu Parambu, Chalikkavattom, Vennala P.O, Pin 682028, Ernakulam
Sathyan (63 years)
Macheriyil House, Kurubasery P.O, Changamanadu, Aluva 683579
Jayasree Sathyan (Age not specified years)
Macheriyil House, Kurubasery P.O, Chengamanadu, Aluva 683579
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff sought to restrain the 1st defendant and his men from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The 1st defendant and his men are restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property forcefully and to cause any kind of obstruction to the plaintiff to use the plaint schedule property for running the business of fish trade.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to get the costs of the suit from the 1st defendant.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to get the costs of the suit from the 1st defendant.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Licence
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document shows that the plaintiff obtained a licence from Kochi Corporation for running the business of sale of fish.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Marine Fisheries Identity Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is an identity card issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, Marine Fisheries, supporting the plaintiff's business credentials.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt shows that the plaintiff is paying tax before Kochi Municipal Corporation.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Rent Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt shows that the plaintiff is paying rent in respect of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report filed by the Advocate Commissioner showing that the plaintiff is running fish trade in the building.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
These photographs are showing the plaintiff's business operations in the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a) to C1(e)