Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Boobily Peter and Bobin Peter, are seeking an injunction against the defendant, Reliance Infratel Limited, for not removing a mobile tower installed on their father's property. The lease agreement for the tower expired on 28.01.2023, and the defendant has failed to comply with their demands.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction to remove the mobile tower within three months
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed with an order for the defendant to remove the mobile tower installed on the plaintiff's property within three months.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established their case with the lease agreement, and the defendant failed to rebut the evidence.
The plaintiffs established their case with the lease agreement, and the defendant failed to rebut the evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The plaint averments, affidavit and the documents would establish the case of the plaintiffs. There is no evidence to rebut the evidence adduced on the side of the plaintiffs.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows; 1)The defendant is hereby directed by a decree of mandatory injunction to remove the mobile tower of “Reliance” installed on 28.01.2008 in the property of K.M. Pathrose (father of the plaintiffs), within a period of 3 (three) months from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Boobily Peter
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Bobin Peter
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Reliance Infratel Limited
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of lease agreement dated 10.04.2008, Returned Lawyer's notice issued to the defendant dated 02.08.2023, Postal receipt
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rajan K Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant directed to remove the mobile tower installed in the property of K.M. Pathrose.
Evidence:
the defendant is hereby directed by a decree of mandatory injunction to remove the mobile tower of 'Reliance' installed on 28.01.2008 in the property of K.M. Pathrose (father of the plaintiffs), within a period of 3 (three) months from today.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Lease Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photocopy of the lease agreement executed between the plaintiffs' father and the defendant for installing a mobile tower.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Returned lawyer's notice issued to the defendant demanding payment and the return of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt associated with the lawyer's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Boobily Peter vs Reliance Infratel Limited regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Boobily Peter vs Reliance Infratel Limited regarding injunction