Case Summary
The case involves K K Divakaran and Sandya as plaintiffs against Sushama C K and Jayasimhan M G as defendants. The plaintiffs seek an injunction against unauthorized construction by the defendants on their property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Appointment of Advocate Commissioner to ascertain matters related to unauthorized construction.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petition for the appointment of an advocate commissioner to inspect the property in question. This will facilitate the proper adjudication of the case regarding the unauthorized construction.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found necessity in appointing an advocate commissioner to ensure a fair trial.
The court found necessity in appointing an advocate commissioner to ensure a fair trial.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found necessity in appointing an advocate commissioner to ensure a fair trial.
The court found necessity in appointing an advocate commissioner to ensure a fair trial.
Supporting Evidence
Therefore, this court is satisfied that the ascertainment of the matters sought in commission application is necessary for the proper adjudication of the suit.
Judgment Evidence:
In the light of the above discussion, the petition is allowed on the following terms:-
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K K Divakaran
- Relation
- S/o late Kelan Kunjappan
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sandya
- Relation
- W/o Mukesh and D/o Divakaran
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sushama C K
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- D/o late Krishnan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jayasimhan M G
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- S/o late M A Gangadharan
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rapheeque C K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nidhinkumar K B
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Vidhya C V
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Vijeendra Chandran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreya Kuriakose
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ajmal K M
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Deepthi Bose
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Chitra S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- T K Radhakrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- S Sreedevi
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Chitra R Shenoy
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- T R Harikrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Haritha Ullas
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Mohammed Sabir
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Appointment of an advocate commissioner with the assistance of an expert engineer and surveyor to inspect the plaint schedule property and ascertain the matters mentioned.
Evidence:
the petition is to be allowed in the interest of the justice and an advocate commissioner is to be appointed to collect valuable inputs for a proper and fair adjudication of the above suit
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between K K Divakaran et al vs Sushama C K et al regarding injunction for unauthorized construction
Case Code Year
Case between K K Divakaran et al vs Sushama C K et al regarding injunction for unauthorized construction