Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT NO 59/2025

Case between Jameela Abdul Nazar vs Poolakkantavida Shameer regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and damages for unauthorized use.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Judge
Sri. Yadukrishnan. B
Order Date
2025-07-30
Duration
approximately-1 year 11 months
Case Closed
Wed, 07/30/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Jameela Abdul Nazar, filed a suit against the defendant, Poolakkantavida Shameer, for a permanent prohibitory injunction and damages. The case revolves around a property license agreement and the unauthorized occupation of the property by the defendant after the license period had expired.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, directing the defendant to vacate the property and awarding damages for unauthorized use.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction directing the defendant to vacate the property within one month and a permanent prohibitory injunction from altering the house.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, directing the defendant to vacate the property and awarding damages for unauthorized use.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established a case in her favor as the defendant was absent and the claims remained unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established a case in her favor as the defendant was absent and the claims remained unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has established a case in her favour. Since the defendant is proceeded exparte the case of the plaintiff stands unchallenged and undisputed.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. A mandatory injunction is passed directing the defendant to vacate the house situated in the plaint schedule property by removing all the articles belonging to him and also to handover the possession of the plaint schedule property including the house to the plaintiff within a period of one month from the date of passing the decree.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Jameela Abdul Nazar
Party Age
53
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Poolakkantavida Shameer
Party Age
42
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Assignment Deed No. 727/2021, Basic Tax Receipt, Building Tax Receipt, License Agreement, Lawyer Notice, Postal Receipt, Postal Acknowledgment Card.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. M.V.P Abdul Majeed
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt. Devika Suresh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Directing the defendant to vacate the property and hand over possession.
Evidence:
A mandatory injunction is passed directing the defendant to vacate the house situated in the plaint schedule property by removing all the articles belonging to him and also to handover the possession of the plaint schedule property including the house to the plaintiff within a period of one month from the date of passing the decree.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendant from causing any alteration or wastage of the property.
Evidence:
The defendant, their men or agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from causing any alteration of the house situated in the plaint schedule property and also from committing any act of wastage in the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Compensation for unauthorized use and occupation of the property.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize an amount of Rs.8,000/- from 03.06.2024 to 03.04.2025 and is entitled to get Rs.80,000/- with 9% interest from the date of suit till date of realization towards damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the house situated in the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Awarding costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to get the costs of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the ownership of the property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms the plaintiff's ownership by showing tax paid for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as evidence of tax obligations fulfilled by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: License Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the arrangement allowing the defendant temporary use of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notifies the defendant to vacate the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as proof of communication sent to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms the defendant received the communication.
Reference:
Ext.A7

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Jameela Abdul Nazar vs Poolakkantavida Shameer regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and damages for unauthorized use.
Case Code Year
Case between Jameela Abdul Nazar vs Poolakkantavida Shameer regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and damages for unauthorized use.

Quick Facts

Location
Nadapuram, Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Case Filed
Mon, 09/06/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
Wed, 07/30/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 04/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between SYNDICATE BANK vs ADARSH. A. C et al regarding dismissal of suit.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between JANU vs BAHULEYAN @ BABU regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Thondarkulangara Korumbathi et al vs Thondarkulangara Chekkon et al regarding preliminary decree
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Irumbanandiyil Aboobacker Haji et al vs Haris et al regarding permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Alikkutty. T. P vs Irumbanandiyil Aboobacker Haji regarding dismissal for default
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won