Case Summary
The plaintiff, Devassy Felix, is seeking an injunction against the defendants, John and Cleetus, for obstructing his access to his property. The case involves allegations of illegal construction and improper use of a shared pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants, their men and agents are restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaint B schedule property by plaintiff.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, granting an injunction against the defendants to restrain them from obstructing the plaintiff's access to the shared pathway.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved that defendants obstructed his right of way, causing difficulties in accessing his property.
The plaintiff proved that defendants obstructed his right of way, causing difficulties in accessing his property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved that defendants obstructed his right of way, causing difficulties in accessing his property.
The plaintiff proved that defendants obstructed his right of way, causing difficulties in accessing his property.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence clearly showed that the plaintiff has been given right to passage through plaint B schedule pathway and the defendants' actions were obstructing this right.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed partly on the following terms: Defendants, their men and agents are restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaint B schedule property by plaintiff and also from parking vehicles obstructing the right of way of plaintiff over plaint B schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Devassy Felix @ Felix
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- John
- Party Age
- 57
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Cleetus.T.X
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Release deed No.4356/2010, Land tax receipt no.KL07022102466/2020, Notice bearing no:ISO/MOP3/3043/2017, Certified copy of the FIR in Crime No. 593/2017.
Defendants Documents
Sale deed no. 217/2004, Release deed no. 3380/2006, Certified copy of Sale deed no. 4064/2010.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sadik Ismayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreejith.S.Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Joy Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Varghese.J.Punnachalil
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's rights over the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
Defendants, their men and agents are restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaint B schedule property by plaintiff and also from parking vehicles obstructing the right of way of plaintiff over plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Request to remove illegal constructions carried out by the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff has failed to prove that he is entitled to a decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for.
Relief Type:
Counter Claim
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Defendants' counter claim was dismissed.
Evidence:
Counter claim is dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the plaintiff's ownership and rights over the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the plaintiff's payment of land tax for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicates a formal complaint to municipal authorities regarding the defendants' actions.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
FIR
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Records the plaintiff's police complaint regarding the defendants’ actions.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Visual evidence of the obstruction caused by defendants in the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Application
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Request to set aside a prior order from Cochin Corporation.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Proves the defendant's ownership over the defendant's property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Supports the defendants' claim regarding ownership and rights to the properties.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Occupancy Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Indicates that the defendants' property had completed parking space.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provided evidence regarding the conditions of the properties involved.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2017