Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
Original Suit No. 99 of 2014

Case between Kadalayi Hussain et al vs Kunhalikutty regarding mandatory injunction and damages for use and occupation

Court
Court of the Munsiff of Tirur
Judge
Smt. Vincy.T.V.,B.A, LL.B.
Order Date
2016-12-09
Duration
2 years

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Plaintiffs, including Kadalayi Hussain and Bushra, sought a mandatory injunction and damages against defendant Kunhalikutty for unauthorized occupation of their property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, granting a mandatory injunction for the defendant to vacate the property and ordering payment of damages for occupation.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction for eviction and damages for occupation
Case Type
Civil Suit - Mandatory Injunction and Damages
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs are entitled to vacant possession due to revocation of license agreement and unauthorized occupation by the defendant.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit is decreed as follows: 1. The defendant is directed by a mandatory injunction to vacate the plaint schedule property within a period of one month from today.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Kadalayi Hussain (59 years) Valavannur amsom, desom, Tirur Taluk Bushra (43 years) Valavannur amsom, desom, Tirur Taluk Ahammed Kabeer (24 years) Valavannur amsom, desom, Tirur Taluk

Defendants

Kunhalikutty (64 years) Vattapparambil House, Chammravattom, Tirur Taluk

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory injunction for eviction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs granted an injunction order for the defendant to vacate the property.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed by a mandatory injunction to vacate the plaint schedule property within a period of one month from today.
Relief Type: Damages for occupation
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs entitled to damages at the rate of Rs. 10,000 per month for defendant's use of the property.
Evidence:
Plaintiffs are entitled to realise costs of the suit from the defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Registered Notice with Postal Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of lawyer notice issued for defendant to vacate the property.
Reference:
A1
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment of notice sent to the defendant.
Reference:
A2
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Response from defendant denying suitability of the property for a Super Market.
Reference:
A3

Quick Facts

Location
Tirur
Case Filed
Tue, 12/09/2014 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases