Case Summary
This case involves plaintiffs K.S. Mujeeb and others seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against defendants Muhammad Sajas and others regarding the operation of a saw mill. The plaintiffs argue that the saw mill causes public nuisance and environmental pollution.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Partial
Relief Granted
Defendants are restrained from operating the saw mill without complying with the directions of the commissioner
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is partly decreed. The defendants are restrained from operating the saw mill without complying with safety measures as directed in the environmental report.
Key Reasoning:
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is partly decreed as follows:- The defendants are restrained by a decree of prohibitory injunction restraining them from operating the saw mill without complying with the directions of the commissioner as mentioned in Ext.C2 report.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K.S. Mujeeb
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- V.S. Shajahan
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- P.P. Sulaiman
- Party Age
- 66
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Laila Sulaiman
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jasmin Mujeeb
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Muhammad Sajas
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shibily
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thresiamma Scariah
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shemina Shibily
- Party Age
- 46
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No. 426/2016, Building permit issued by Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath
Defendants Documents
License No. 623/2021/A2/8590 issued by Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath, License No. A2 106/2022 -2023/478 issued by Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- George Kurian
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Muhammed Haris K.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Binoy Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- B. Bijoy
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs sought to restrain the defendants from operating the saw mill.
Evidence:
The suit is partly decreed as follows:- The defendants are restrained by a decree of prohibitory injunction restraining them from operating the saw mill without complying with the directions of the commissioner as mentioned in Ext.C2 report.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 426/2016 establishes ownership of the plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Corresponding land tax receipt supports the ownership of plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Building permit obtained from Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath allows construction on plaint schedule item No.1.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of partition deed No. 5100/2007 establishes ownership of plaint schedule item No.2 property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Corresponding land tax receipt supports the ownership of plaint schedule item No.2 property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Building permit obtained from Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath allows construction on plaint schedule item No.2.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter from Environmental Engineer indicates concerns about the saw mill's compliance with safety regulations.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter from the Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath indicates that permission was not granted for the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter from the Panchayath Deputy Director detailing concerns about the saw mill's operation.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
License issued by Kanjirappally Grama Panchayath allowing operation of the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
License issued for a subsequent operational period of the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of license issued for the saw mill confirming compliance with operational requirements.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of another license issued for the saw mill for future compliance.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
License issued by the DFO for the saw mill's operation.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Consent
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Consent issued by Kerala State Pollution Control Board for the operation of the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report that includes findings on potential nuisances caused by the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report filed by Senior Environmental Engineer detailing compliance and safety measures for the saw mill.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2017