Case Summary
The plaintiffs, K.K.Kamalam and Sreekumar V.S, are seeking to recover possession of land that they claim has been encroached upon by the defendants, K.A.Thankamma Raveendran and Vamadevan. The defendants deny the claims, stating that their construction was within their property lines.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Recovery of possession and mandatory injunction to demolish the compound wall.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing them to recover possession of the encroached land and ordering the defendants to demolish the illegal compound wall. The defendants must surrender possession within three months.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff was able to prove her ownership and the encroachment by the defendants.
The plaintiff was able to prove her ownership and the encroachment by the defendants.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff was able to prove her ownership and the encroachment by the defendants.
The plaintiff was able to prove her ownership and the encroachment by the defendants.
Supporting Evidence
From the report, it can be ascertained that the survey No. 995/2 has been subdivided into different plots with specific measurements. The advocate commissioner noted that the extent of the defendant property is 3 cents.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows, Plaintiff is entitled for recovery of possession of plot shown as violet colour having an extent of 0.006 ares. Defendants are directed to surrender vacant possession within three months from the date of decree.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K.K.Kamalam
- Party Age
- 71
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sreekumar V.S
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K.A.Thankamma Raveendran
- Party Age
- 60
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vamadevan
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of the Partition deed no. 1846/91 of SRO, Ernakulam.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- A.Balagopalan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- A.Rajagopalan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.N.Manmadhan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sojo J Kallidukkil
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Syamsankar Panicker
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Suraj Krishna B.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Jishnu M.V
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Febin Raj T.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Recovery of possession of the encroached plot of land.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed as follows, Plaintiff is entitled for recovery of possession of plot shown as violet colour having an extent of 0.006 ares.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Mandatory injunction to demolish the western boundary wall.
Evidence:
Defendants are directed by way of a mandatory injunction to demolish the western boundary wall within 3 months.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff entitled to realize the cost of the suit from defendants.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize the cost of the suit from defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the plaintiff's title and ownership over the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provided measurements and findings about the property boundaries relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the property boundaries and encroachments as assessed by the advocate commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Includes depositions from both the plaintiff and defendant's witnesses.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between K.K.Kamalam vs K.A.Thankamma Raveendran regarding recovery of possession.
Case Code Year
Case between K.K.Kamalam vs K.A.Thankamma Raveendran regarding recovery of possession.