Case Summary
The case involves a petition by E.A Varghese and Basil Varghese seeking a temporary injunction against Sukumaran and others to prevent obstruction of access to their property. The plaintiffs claim a right of easement over a way needed for access to their property, which the defendants are attempting to obstruct.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary injunction against the defendants.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for temporary injunction, restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiffs' access through the way needed for transportation to their property, affirming the prima facie case and balance of convenience in favor of the plaintiffs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case for their right of easement based on continuous and open use of the way for over 50 years.
The plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case for their right of easement based on continuous and open use of the way for over 50 years.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case for their right of easement based on continuous and open use of the way for over 50 years.
The plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case for their right of easement based on continuous and open use of the way for over 50 years.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs are using the way to have access to plaint A schedule item No. 1 to plaint B schedule way. The rights of the parties can only be decided at a later stage. The existence of the plaint B schedule way and the use of the way to have access to plaint A schedule item No. 1 would go to show a prima facie case in favour of the petitioners.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition stands allowed as follows: The respondents or their men are restrained from obstructing the transportation through plaint B schedule way by the petitioners or cause any obstruction in the way or do any destructions to the same or change any physical features of the way or obstruct the peaceful usage of the plaint B schedule way by the petitioners or do any act detrimental to the rights of the petitioners over the plaint B schedule way.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- E.A Varghese
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Basil Varghese
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sukumaran
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Gireeshkumar
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- T.T. Leela
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mary Abraham
- Party Age
- 72
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jibi N. Abraham
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of settlement deed No.3098/1999, Consent from Kerala State Pollution Control Board, Copy of the written statement and counter claim in O.S. 52/2022.
Defendants Documents
Photographs submitted on 13/12/2024, Sale agreement, Copy of the plaint in O.S. 52/2022.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- B.Reghukumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manoj. S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manjula M.K.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Syleshwaran Nair R.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Swathy Krishna
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Asmi M.A.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Farhaza Hassan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Muhammad Ashraf V.A.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Aparna K.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P.T. Geevarghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Rohan Roy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sanjay S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A.P. Paul
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Temporary Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Petitioners sought a temporary injunction to restrain the respondents from obstructing transportation through plaint B schedule way.
Evidence:
Hence, I find that, the petitioners are entitled for the relief of temporary injunction as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Pertains to the declaration of right of easement by prescription.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to demonstrate the condition of the way.
Reference:
Ext.A2 (Series)
Document Type:
Consent
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
From Kerala State Pollution Control Board related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Written Statement and Counter Claim
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Pertains to ongoing litigation in O.S. 52/2022.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Patta
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Status Quo Order
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Related to the continuation of status quo in O.S. 52/2022.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Survey Sketch
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows layout of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further establishes the status of property.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Form Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Issued regarding property matters.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Repeated document establishing property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another document conveying property interest.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the transaction of property.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further establishes property status.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
Survey Sketch
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Recent sketch submitted concerning property.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Used to show the state of the property in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B1 (series)
Document Type:
Sale Agreement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Pertains to the ownership and transaction of property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Sale Agreement Copy
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Demonstrates details of the sale agreement.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Plaint Copy
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Relevant to O.S. 52/2022 litigation.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Status Quo Order
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Related to maintaining status of property in O.S. 52/2022.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Submitted to provide evidence regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Commission report and Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Used to clarify the layout and status of contested property.
Reference:
Ext.C1 & C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between E.A Varghese et al vs Sukumaran et al regarding declaration of right of easement by prescription and perpetual injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between E.A Varghese et al vs Sukumaran et al regarding declaration of right of easement by prescription and perpetual injunction.