Case Summary
Jose Mathew is the plaintiff who has filed this suit against Muhammed Rawther and others regarding specific performance of an agreement to sell property. The case involves disputes over property ownership and trespass.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant No.10 is directed to execute sale deed in favor of plaintiff. Permanent prohibitory injunctions granted.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed directing the additional 10th defendant to execute a sale deed in favor of the plaintiff and granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants regarding the plaint schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiff proved the genuineness of the agreement and entitlement to the property.
Plaintiff proved the genuineness of the agreement and entitlement to the property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiff proved the genuineness of the agreement and entitlement to the property.
Plaintiff proved the genuineness of the agreement and entitlement to the property.
Supporting Evidence
This exhibits the readiness and willingness of plaintiff to get the property executed in his favour. The evidence shows that 1st defendant handed over the possession of the plaint schedule item No.3 property to plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows; 1. Addl. 10th defendant is directed to execute sale deed in favour of plaintiff with respect to 2.02 ares of property comprised in resurvey No.86/4 in Koovappally village within two months from the date of decree.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jose Mathew
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Muhammed Rawther
- Party Age
- 80
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Gopinathan
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ponnamma Gopinathan
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mini
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Harija
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Agreement executed by E. Muhammed Rawther in favour of Jose Mathew dated 09.03.2002.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Soni Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- George Kurian
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- T.S Rajeswaran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P.A. Muhammed Shameer
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Specific Performance
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Decree directing additional 10th defendant to execute sale deed in favour of plaintiff.
Evidence:
Addl. 10th defendant is directed to execute sale deed in favour of plaintiff with respect to 2.02 ares of property comprised in resurvey No.86/4 in Koovappally village within two months from the date of decree.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Decree restraining additional 10th defendant from executing any document alienating plaint schedule item No.3 property.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the addl. defendant No.10 from executing any document alienating plaint schedule item No.3 property except for the plaintiff.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Decree restraining defendants from trespassing on plaint schedule item No.3 property.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing on plaint schedule item No.3 property, destroying the existing boundaries, constructing new road, and interfering with the peaceful enjoyment of plaintiff over plaint schedule item No.3 property.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff allowed to recover costs from the defendants.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is allowed to recover the costs from the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the claim of the plaintiff that the 1st defendant agreed to sell 5 cents of property to plaintiff for sale consideration.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Prepared by Commissioner Advocate Faizal M. Kassim.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2006