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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O. S. No.68/2025

Case between Indira vs Radhamani regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Sumey Chandran
Order Date
2025-10-15
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Indira and Deepanjali, are seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, who are their close relatives and neighbors. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants are attempting to unlawfully widen a pathway and encroach upon their property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting them a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants to prevent any encroachment or alteration of their property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiffs was unchallenged and supported their claims of illegal encroachment by the defendants.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows:- The defendants, their men, agents, servants and anybody claiming under them, are hereby restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from widening the pathway situated on the northern side of the plaint schedule property, and from demolishing, altering, damaging, or in any manner interfering with the north, south and west portions of the existing compound wall of the plaint schedule property.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Indira (74 years years) Petro Nest, Flat, Kaloor Desom, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk Deepanjali (45 years years) Petro Nest, Flat, Kaloor Desom, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk

Defendants

Radhamani (50 years years) Perincheri Puthen Veettil, Mudakkuzha P.O., Akanadu Kara, Vengoor West Village, Pin: 683 546 Kanjana (60 years years) Perincheri Puthen Veettil, Mudakkuzha P.O., Akanadu Kara, Vengoor West Village, Pin: 683 546 Nandakumar (62 years years) Parappalli House, Mudakkuzha P.O., Akanadu Kara, Vengoor West Village, Pin: 683 546 Jinesh Sugathan (40 years years) Kuzhuppilly House, Mudakkuzha P.O., Akanadu Kara, Vengoor West Village, Pin: 683 546 Arjun (27 years years) Parappalli House, Mudakkuzha P.O., Akanadu Kara, Vengoor West Village, Pin: 683 546

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from trespassing and interfering with the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants, their men, agents, servants and anybody claiming under them, are hereby restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from widening the pathway situated on the northern side of the plaint schedule property, and from demolishing, altering, damaging, or in any manner interfering with the north, south and west portions of the existing compound wall of the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are entitled to realize the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to realise the costs of the suit from the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Certified copy of Will Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves ownership of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the historical ownership and partitioning of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Visual evidence related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms that the plaintiffs are maintaining tax responsibilities for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Commission report and Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provides additional context and verification of the property boundaries as per the court's requirements.
Reference:
Ext.C1 and C1(a)

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases