Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. 276/2023

Case between Joseph Chacko vs Manju Joseph et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Judge
Smitha Susan Mathew
Order Date
2025-10-31
Duration
approximately-2 months
Case Code No.
276
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Joseph Chacko is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against Manju Joseph and three other defendants. The case revolves around the obstruction of construction of a boundary wall on the plaintiff's property by the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted the plaintiff a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, restraining them from obstructing the construction of a boundary wall on the plaintiff's property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Decree of permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted the plaintiff a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, restraining them from obstructing the construction of a boundary wall on the plaintiff's property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence submitted by plaintiff remains unrebutted.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence submitted by plaintiff remains unrebutted.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence available would show that plaint schedule item No.2 road is lying on the southern side of plaint schedule item No.1 property and PW1 has right to use of that road.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from obstructing the construction of compound wall on the southern side of item No.1 and destructing any part of it during or after its construction.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Joseph Chacko
Party Age
54
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Manju Joseph
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jose Joseph
Party Age
54
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Lissy
Party Age
58
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Pankajakshiyamma
Party Age
76
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No.3950/2004, Certified copy of rectification deed No.2113/2017, Tax receipts dated 20.06.2022 and 12.05.2025, Certified copy of deed No.1365/19.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
George Kurian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Riyas Bin Karim
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from obstructing the construction of a compound wall on the southern side of item No.1.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from obstructing the construction of compound wall on the southern side of item No.1 and destructing any part of it during or after its construction.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Entitlement of the plaintiff to costs of the suit from defendants.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is entitled to get the cost of the suit from defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed showing plaintiff's title and possession of plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Rectification Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of rectification deed related to plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt showing the plaintiff's payment for item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt showing the plaintiff's payment for item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed showing plaintiff's right of use of the item No.2 road.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Copy of plaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of plaint in OS 362/2017 showing the legal background of the property dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of commission report relevant to OS 362/2017.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Survey Plan
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of survey plan prepared by surveyor relevant to the property dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A7(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
2023

Quick Facts

Location
Kanjirappally Taluk
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Case Filed
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Elsamma Kuriakose vs The Chief Manager (Authorised Officer) regarding dismissal of suit.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Johnson Joseph vs Raveendran @ Kunjumon et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Unnikrishnan K vs Mohanan regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Hellen Joseph vs Joji Thomas regarding realisation of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sheela Raju et al vs P.K. Madhu et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won