Case Summary
The case involves Jose P.U, the plaintiff, seeking an injunction against Suliakha and others. The plaintiff claims ownership and peaceful possession of the property, which was allegedly encroached upon by the defendants.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the defendants in case OS 310/2016, fixing boundaries and issuing mandatory injunctions relating to the property. The plaintiff's suit OS 343/2016 was dismissed.
Key Reasoning:
The boundaries and rights over the properties were correctly established based on surveyed evidence.
The boundaries and rights over the properties were correctly established based on surveyed evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The court determined the necessity of fixing boundaries based on the detailed survey and evidence presented.
Judgment Evidence:
OS 343/2016 is dismissed with costs and OS 310/2016 is decreed with specific directions on property boundaries.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jose P.U
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Suliakha
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ummukulsu
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thahira
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kunjumuhammed
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abdul Jaleel
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of Agreement dated 21.08.13, Photocopy of Lease Agreement dated 15.09.10, Photocopy of Sale Deed No. 585/83, Photocopy of Sale Deed No. 788/90, Photocopy of Tax Receipt.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of the partition deed No. 975/1967, Certified copy of the Sale Deed No. 585/1983, Certified copy of the Sale Deed No. 788/1990, Certified copy of the Sale Deed No. 2472/16, Certified copy of the Receipt dated 15.09.22.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.P.Santhi
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P.A.Abdul Jabbar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Muhammed Shafi
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Requested a mandatory injunction to construct a boundary wall.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs sought a decree of mandatory injunction to construct the compound wall illegally demolished by the defendants.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Requested a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent defendants from trespassing.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are seeking a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants and their men from trespassing into the property of the plaintiff.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
Boundary of the properties in question was fixed.
Evidence:
The boundary of A B and C schedule in the suit is fixed as per the Ext.C3(a) sketch.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document serves as proof of the agreement for sale of land between the plaintiff and the original owners.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lease Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the lease agreement under which the plaintiff conducts his business.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates ownership regarding the sale of a portion of land related to the claim.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Asserts details of the sale pertaining to the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payment for the property, supporting the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes the ownership of the defendants over certain properties as per family partition.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Details the sale of land from the plaintiffs' predecessor to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Further establishes the land transactions between the predecessors.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Shows a sale transaction involving the defendants and helps support their position.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Proves that the defendants are paying tax, indicating their possession and rights.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Interim Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The court's report on the property measurement relevant to the suits.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Interim Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Continues the court's assessment of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Final report filed by the advocate commissioner detailing findings on the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property boundaries as per commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Various witnesses provided oral testimony relevant to the case.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Jose P.U vs Suliakha et al regarding mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction and fixation of boundary
Case Code Year
Case between Jose P.U vs Suliakha et al regarding mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction and fixation of boundary