Case Summary
Fathima has filed a suit against Thithachu and others seeking a perpetual prohibitory injunction. The case revolves around the ownership and use of a well situated on the plaint schedule property, which are in dispute between the parties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and obstructing the plaintiff's use of the well.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants restraining them from trespassing and obstructing the plaintiff's use of the well.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved her ownership of the half share in the well and demonstrated unlawful actions by the defendants.
The plaintiff proved her ownership of the half share in the well and demonstrated unlawful actions by the defendants.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved her ownership of the half share in the well and demonstrated unlawful actions by the defendants.
The plaintiff proved her ownership of the half share in the well and demonstrated unlawful actions by the defendants.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has proved that the half right of the Well is set apart to the share of PW1 in view of Ext. A1 document and the same is in his absolute possession and ownership.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: (I) The defendants and their men are restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from trespassing into the plaint schedule property... (II) The defendants and their men are further restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from obstructing the plaintiff from using the Well...
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Fathima
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- W/o Mayiladimmal Saidalavi
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thithachu
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o Mandakathingal Abu
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saleem
- Party Age
- 45
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sabeena
- Party Age
- 42
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Roobi
- Party Age
- 38
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Bushara
- Party Age
- 35
Plaintiffs Documents
Partition Deed No. 1644/1997, Certified copy of Kanam Theeradharam, Doc.No.495/1929
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.A.Samad
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. K. Beena
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Dinesh Pookayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restriction on the defendants from obstructing the plaintiff's use of the well.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are further restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from obstructing the plaintiff from using the Well.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Costs are awarded to the plaintiff.
Evidence:
The costs shall follow the event, hence the defendants shall pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff claims ownership of the plaint schedule property and half share of the well based on this document.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Certified copy of Kanam Theeradharam
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document offers proof regarding the measurements and boundaries related to the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report discusses the findings related to the trespass and damages caused by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This plan illustrates the property boundaries that were under dispute.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further findings related to the commissioner's inspection of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the layout of the property as per the commissioner's findings.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report discusses additional aspects of the commission inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C5
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan drawn up for further clarification regarding boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report detailing the measurements and findings regarding the well.
Reference:
Ext.C7
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the property boundaries including the well as per the commissioner's report.
Reference:
Ext.C8
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Fathima vs Thithachu et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Fathima vs Thithachu et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction