Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 655/2023

Case between Hameed et al vs Johny et al regarding permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction

Court
I Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Sri. Padmakumar.G.
Order Date
2024-04-12
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, legal heirs of Marakkar, are seeking a mandatory injunction to have the defendants shift their gate from one property boundary to another and a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent them from drawing services through the plaintiffs' property. The defendants failed to appear in court, resulting in a decree in favor of the plaintiffs.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed directing the defendants to shift their gate and restraining them from drawing any service connections through the plaintiffs' property. The plaintiffs are also awarded costs of the suit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction directing the defendants to shift the gate and permanent prohibitory injunction against service connections.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The unchallenged proof affidavit and documents satisfactorily proved the plaint claim.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed by a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to shift the gate fixed at the eastern boundary of the plaint B schedule property having its opening into the A schedule property from the eastern boundary to the southern boundary of plaint B schedule property.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Hameed (65 years years) Nedumuttuah, Kundannur Kara, Vazhakala village, Kanayannur taluk, Kakkanad West P.O, Pin – 682 030 Ashraf (58 years years) Nedumuttuah, Kundannur Kara, Vazhakala village, Kanayannur taluk, Kakkanad West P.O, Pin – 682 030

Defendants

Johny (61 years years) Koikkara house, Kundannur kara, Vazakkala village, Kanayannur taluk, Kakkanad West P.O, Pin – 682 030 Aji Johny (52 years years) Koikkara house, Kundannur kara, Vazakkala village, Kanayannur taluk, Kakkanad West P.O, Pin – 682 030

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Directed the defendants to shift the gate from the eastern boundary to the southern boundary of the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed by a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to shift the gate fixed at the eastern boundary of the plaint B schedule property having its opening into the A schedule property from the eastern boundary to the southern boundary of plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restrained the defendants from drawing any service connection through the A schedule property and obstructing development of the pathway.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed by a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from drawing any service connection, including water, electricity, cable or piped gas, through the A schedule property, and from obstructing the plaintiffs and other co owners of the plaint schedule property from developing the same by laying interlocking tiles or otherwise.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Entitled the plaintiff to the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Sale Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the ownership and right of way related to the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Certified copy of the Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supports the claim regarding the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Certified copy of the Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides evidence of legal claims related to the plaint schedule.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Photocopy of the Complaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Documents the dispute and the complaint filed by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A4

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases