Case Summary
Kavitha Balakrishnan, the plaintiff, seeks an injunction against Faisal C.H, the defendant, to prevent him from constructing a boundary wall and encroaching upon her property. The case involves allegations of property rights and boundary disputes between the two parties who are relatives.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Interim prohibitory injunction against the defendant
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petitioner's request for an interim order of injunction, making it absolute to prevent the defendant from constructing a boundary wall on the disputed land during the pendency of the case.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established entitlement to an interim injunction based on the balance of convenience.
The petitioner established entitlement to an interim injunction based on the balance of convenience.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
To avoid further complications during the pendency of this suit, it is always in the interest of justice that status quo as on the date of the suit is to be maintained.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence, the point is found in favour of petitioner, the petition is allowed. The interim order of injunction is hereby made absolute. In the result, petition is allowed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kavitha Balakrishnan
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Faisal C.H
- Party Age
- 55
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of the Settlement deed no. 3084/14 of SRO Edappally, Copy of the tax receipt bearing Tandapper no. 43033 issued by Edappally South Village Office, Copy of the rough sketch of the property bearing survey no. 198/6 B, 198/6 C, Photographs (3 nos)
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.S.Unnikrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Aaditya Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ardra Krishnan M
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Diya Merin Bijli
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sajan Manali
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Haritha
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Praseetha T.K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The petitioner sought a prohibitory injunction to prevent the respondent from encroaching upon the petitioner's property.
Evidence:
Hence, the point is found in favour of petitioner, the petition is allowed. The ad interim order of injunction is hereby made absolute.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the petitioner's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the petitioner's claim regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides a visual representation of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
These photographs serve as evidence of the property and its condition.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report details the boundaries and condition of the property relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Kavitha Balakrishnan vs Faisal C.H regarding boundary fixation and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Kavitha Balakrishnan vs Faisal C.H regarding boundary fixation and injunction