Case Summary
The plaintiffs, who are siblings, are seeking an injunction against the defendants to prevent them from obstructing their access to a specified roadway which the plaintiffs claim to have used for several years. The defendants argue that they have rights over the roadway and have blocked its use by the plaintiffs.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from obstructing the user of the B schedule road.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The plaintiffs' claim for an injunction has been upheld, preventing the defendants from obstructing the use of a road that the plaintiffs have been utilizing. Additionally, the third defendant is mandated to restore the roadway to its original state.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs proved continuous and open use of the B schedule road for over 25 years.
The plaintiffs proved continuous and open use of the B schedule road for over 25 years.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs proved continuous and open use of the B schedule road for over 25 years.
The plaintiffs proved continuous and open use of the B schedule road for over 25 years.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs have established their easementary right over the B schedule way and successfully proved that their use has been continuous, open, and without interruption for a significant duration, which gives them a legal claim to utilize the pathway as of right.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: I. The defendants and their men are restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from causing any obstruction to the user of the B schedule road by the plaintiffs. II. The defendants and their men are further restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from altering the nature and lie of the B schedule road. III. The defendant No.3 is directed, by way of mandatory injunction, to restore the B schedule way into its original position.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Hassan
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Hussain
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kunhayissa
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kadeeja
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nabeesa
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chakkarathodi Kunhalan Musliyar
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chakkarathodi Moidutty haji
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sulaiman
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Mortgage Deed No. 464/1949, Tax receipt.
Defendants Documents
Partition Deed No.490/1978, Certified Copy of Partition Deed, No.4361/2013.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Suresh A Alingal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P.Najmudheen
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C.Nandakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Dinesh Pookkayil
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from causing any obstruction to the user of the B schedule road.
Evidence:
I. The defendants and their men are restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from causing any obstruction to the user of the B schedule road by the plaintiffs.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are further restrained from altering the nature and lie of the B schedule road.
Evidence:
II. The defendants and their men are further restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from altering the nature and lie of the B schedule road.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant No.3 is directed to restore the B schedule way into its original position.
Evidence:
III. The defendant No.3 is directed, by way of mandatory injunction, to restore the B schedule way into its original position.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are entitled to realise the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
V. Plaintiffs are entitled to realise the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Mortgage Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original document proving the ownership of the property and its mortgage history.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Panayam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document indicating assignment of property rights.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Panayam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another assignment deed related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document detailing the partition of property among heirs.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt evidencing the payment of taxes for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Certified copy of FIR
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
FIR documenting incidents related to the property dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Copy of complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Complaint lodged with authorities pertaining to the issue.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Certified copy of final report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Final report of investigation regarding the case.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Copy of Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Partition deed establishing ownership claims by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document establishing the partition of property relevant to defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court commissioner's report on the inspection of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan prepared by the court commissioner showing the layout of the disputed property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further commissioner's report detailing findings during inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan illustrating details from the court commissioner's report.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report on the condition and changes observed at the property.
Reference:
Ext.C5
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan accompanying the commissioner's report outlines.
Reference:
Ext.C6
Case Classification
Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Hassan et al vs Chakkarathodi Kunhalan Musliyar et al regarding Injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Hassan et al vs Chakkarathodi Kunhalan Musliyar et al regarding Injunction