Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 474/2016

Case between Edison Gilbert et al vs Gopalakrishna Pillai et al regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Judge
Smt. Sofia.T.A
Order Date
2025-08-08
Duration
approximately-9 years 1 month
Case Closed
Fri, 08/08/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Edison Gilbert and Jolamma, are seeking a fixation of the boundary and a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Gopalakrishna Pillai and others, who are disputing their ownership of the property. The matter involves allegations of destruction of boundary markers by the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit with costs to the defendants, concluding that the plaintiffs did not have the title and possession over the properties in question.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit with costs to the defendants, concluding that the plaintiffs did not have the title and possession over the properties in question.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove title and possession over the plaint schedule properties.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove title and possession over the plaint schedule properties.
Supporting Evidence
The court found that the plaintiffs did not have title and possession over the properties.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Edison Gilbert
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Jolamma
Party Age
43
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Gopalakrishna Pillai
Party Age
60
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ratheesh kumar
Party Age
33
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Dhanasree
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jayakumari
Party Age
33
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mini
Party Age
32
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copies of Sale Deed No. 2324/2011, Sale Deed No. 2323/2011, Tax receipt
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3330/2007, Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 296/08, Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3211/2008, Certified copy of Decree in OS 462/2007

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.Jalaludheen
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K.Jayakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs requested a permanent prohibitory injunction concerning the boundary.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs to the defendants.
Relief Type: Fixation of Boundary
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs requested the court to fix the northern boundary of the plaint A schedule properties.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs to the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 2324/2011 related to the property in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 2323/2011 related to the property in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows that the plaintiffs have paid land tax for the properties.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Report by the advocate commissioner regarding the boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3330/2007, relevant to the dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 296/08, relevant to the dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3211/2008, relevant to the dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Decree
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of decree in OS 462/2007, relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.B5

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Edison Gilbert et al vs Gopalakrishna Pillai et al regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Edison Gilbert et al vs Gopalakrishna Pillai et al regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Kollam
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Case Filed
Fri, 01/01/2016 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 08/08/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Vijayendran, Chithra vs Yamunadevi regarding review of order
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Navasudeen.S vs Sira Group regarding review of an earlier order
Court of the Munsiff, Kollam
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sajeev vs T.Unnikrishna Pillai regarding setting aside an exparte decree.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Gopakumar vs K.S.Abdul Manaf regarding Realisation of Money
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM.
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Bank of India vs Shibina. S et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won