Case Summary
The plaintiffs, K N Abdul Gafoor and K N Shamsudheen, are seeking a prohibitory injunction against the defendants, K N Fajar and others, regarding illegal constructions on a jointly owned property. Tensions arose over property rights after the death of family members, leading to this legal dispute.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs did not prove a prima facie case for granting the injunction.
The plaintiffs did not prove a prima facie case for granting the injunction.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed. Parties are directed to bear their respective costs.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
K N Abdul Gafoor (60 years)
Door No. 66/4296, Kasmisons Arcade, M G Road, Opposite to Metro Pillar No. 665, M G Road, Ernakulam, Pin- 682035
K N Shamsudheen (66 years)
Door No. 66/4298 & 4299, Kasmisons Arcade, M G Road, Opposite to Metro Pillar No. 665, M G Road, Ernakulam, Pin- 682035
Defendants
K N Fajar (55 years)
Door No. CC 66/4297, Kasmisons Arcade, M G Road, Opposite to Metro Pillar No. 665, M G Road, Ernakulam, Pin- 682035
K N Marzook (65 years)
Door No. CC 66/4295, Kasmisons Arcade, M G Road, Opposite to Metro Pillar No. 665, M G Road, Ernakulam, Pin- 682035
Akash (45 years)
Having the registered office at Door No. CC 66/4295, Kasmisons Arcade, M G Road, Opposite to Metro Pillar No. 665, M G Road, Ernakulam, Pin- 682035
Suresh (35 years)
Pandaraprambil House, Mulavukad, Mulavukad P O, Pin- 682504
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Ad interim order of prohibitory injunction sought by the petitioners.
Evidence:
Thus court is satisfied that the petitioner has failed to prove a prima facie case in their favour.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Mandatory injunction directing the respondents to demolish illegal constructions.
Evidence:
Thus grant of temporary injunction would be not in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Sale deed No. 3754/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, demonstrates the plaintiff's ownership of the second floor.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Sale deed No. 3753/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, evidences the plaintiff's ownership of the third and fourth floors.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Sale deed No. 3994/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, confirms the first respondent's ownership of the northern portion of the first floor.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Sale deed No. 3996/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, validates the second respondent's ownership of the middle part of the ground floor.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Sale deed No. 3683/2009 of SRO, Ernakulam, shows joint ownership of the basement floor.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Building tax receipt issued in the name of the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Building tax receipt issued in the name of the second defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Building tax receipt issued in the name of the first plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Building tax receipt issued in the name of the second plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Complaints
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the complaints lodged by the plaintiff before Corporation authorities.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Stop Memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the stop memo issued by the Secretary of the Cochin Corporation.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photographs showing illegal constructions made by the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of Sale deed No. 3995/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, supports the claim of the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of Sale deed No. 3992/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, confirms the second respondent's ownership claim.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of Sale deed No. 4789/1998 of SRO, Ernakulam, substantiates the contentions of the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Interim Order
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of the interim order issued by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Building Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of the Building Certificate issued by the Kochi Municipal Corporation for the second defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type:
Building Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of the Building Certificate issued by the Kochi Corporation for the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type:
Stop Memo
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of stop memo issued by Corporation of Kochi.
Reference:
Ext.B17
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report in IA 3/25 in OS 328/25 providing findings regarding the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Highlights presented by both parties during the hearings.
Reference: