Case Summary
Hilda Johnson@ Mary Hilda filed a petition against Joys Antony and others seeking an ad-interim injunction. The case involves restrictions on property related to trespassing and construction.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Ad-interim injunction restraining defendants from trespassing and construction.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted an ad-interim injunction as requested by the plaintiff.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the delay in issuing notice would defeat the purpose of the suit.
The court found that the delay in issuing notice would defeat the purpose of the suit.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the delay in issuing notice would defeat the purpose of the suit.
The court found that the delay in issuing notice would defeat the purpose of the suit.
Supporting Evidence
The court is satisfied that the delay in issuing notice will defeat the purpose of the suit.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence an ad-interim injunction is granted restraining the defendants/respondents from trespassing into the plaint A and B schedule properties, demolishing the northern compound wall of the plaint A schedule property and from constructions over the plaint C schedule pathway until 07.06.2025.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Hilda Johnson@ Mary Hilda
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Joys Antony
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Philomina Rajappan
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jose Antony
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Lijo Roy.L.D
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Alen.N. Alnbin
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Bibin Raj.B.T
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
An ad-interim injunction was granted restraining the defendants from trespassing and constructing over the specified property.
Evidence:
Hence an ad-interim injunction is granted restraining the defendants/respondents from trespassing into the plaint A and B schedule properties, demolishing the northern compound wall of the plaint A schedule property and from constructions over the plaint C schedule pathway until 07.06.2025.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Affidavit
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The affidavit was perused by the court to make its decision.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Hilda Johnson@ Mary Hilda vs Joys Antony et al regarding ad-interim injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Hilda Johnson@ Mary Hilda vs Joys Antony et al regarding ad-interim injunction