Case Summary
C.K. Ravi is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against K.K. Kalyani and others, who are alleged to have trespassed on his property. The case revolves around the possession of a 1-acre land disputed between the plaintiff and the defendants.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from evicting the plaintiff from the property without due process of law. The plaintiff was found to be in possession of the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully proved his continuous possession of the property and the defendants failed to substantiate their claims of ownership.
The plaintiff successfully proved his continuous possession of the property and the defendants failed to substantiate their claims of ownership.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff successfully proved his continuous possession of the property and the defendants failed to substantiate their claims of ownership.
The plaintiff successfully proved his continuous possession of the property and the defendants failed to substantiate their claims of ownership.
Supporting Evidence
From the discussions in previous paragraphs, it can be seen that the plaintiff is in possession of the plaint schedule property. The defendants could not establish their exclusive title over the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result suit is decreed as follows. 1 A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining defendants 1 to 3 from trespassing on the plaint schedule property, interfering with the peaceful enjoyment of plaintiff therein, committing waste therein and evicting plaintiff from the plaint schedule property without due process of law.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- C.K. Ravi
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K.K. Kalyani
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Santhosh S. Thampi
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saji K. Thampi
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- B/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kerala State
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Director, Scheduled Caste Welfare Department
- Relation
- represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of letter from Scheduled Caste Development Office to District Police Superintendent, Kottayam, Certified copies of reports from Manimala Village Office to Kanjirappally Taluk Office, Government Order No. 491/90, Minutes of a meeting presided over by the District Collector.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Judgment in WP(c) No. 22810/2013, Copy of Judgment in WA No. 442/2023 and 664/2022, Certified copy of Judgment in WPC(c) No. 27804/2024.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- George Kurian
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.A George
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- B. Bijoy
- Appearance Type
- Government Pleader
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining defendants from trespassing or evicting the plaintiff.
Evidence:
Thus the issues are answered accordingly.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certified copy of letter from Scheduled Caste Development Office to District Police Superintendent, Kottayam
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows that a request was made to remove the encroachment over property claimed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Certified copy of report from Manimala Village Office to Kanjirappally Taluk Office
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This report indicates that the plaintiff is in possession of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Certified copy of report from Manimala Village Office to Kanjirappally Taluk Office
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This report corroborates the plaintiff's claim that he is in possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Certified copy of Government Order No. 491/90 of the Scheduled caste/Scheduled Tribe Development (c) Department
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document directs the allotment of 1 acre to the first defendant but lacks proof of allotment by the officer.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Certified copy of Minutes of a meeting presided over by the District Collector
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This minutes show that the first defendant is not a registered beneficiary entitled to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Certified copy of a letter sent by the Tahsildar Kanjirappally to the District Scheduled caste Development Officer
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This letter indicates that the first defendant's property was encroached and not protected.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Report of Village office Manimala
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This report suggests the plaintiff is in possession and there are disputes over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Certified copy of Judgment in WP(c) No. 22810/2013 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This judgment relates to the property claim and establishes that the plaintiff did not appeal the decision.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Copy of Judgment in WA No. 442/2023 and 664/2022 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This judgment was mentioned as dismissed and is part of the ongoing disputes.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Certified copy of Judgment in WPC(c) No. 27804/2024 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This judgment relates to the first defendant's claim on the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Possession Certificate No. 4537/2013
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This certificate provides evidence of the first defendant's claim to property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Certified copy of Judgment in WP(c) No. 4513/2012/(L) of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This judgment is part of the procedural history related to the property dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Mahazar prepared by Commissioner Advocate
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This mahazar provides evidence of the current status of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch prepared by Commissioner Advocate
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This sketch provides a visual representation of the property in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2013