Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Lathakkumari and Sreekala M, are siblings seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Vinod Kumar and Priyanka V.R, who have attempted to trespass on a pathway used by the plaintiffs. The court found in favor of the plaintiffs based on their uncontradicted testimony and evidence.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint D schedule pathway and obstructing the plaintiffs' peaceful use of the same.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
The plaintiffs established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
The plaintiffs established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs reasonably apprehend that the defendants will trespass into the plaint D schedule pathway anytime and obstruct plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of the same. From the uncontroverted testimony of PW1, PW2 and Exts.A1 to A6, Ext.C1 and C1(a), the plaintiffs had established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit decreed with costs as follows: The defendants are restrained by a decree of prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint D schedule pathway and from obstructing the peaceful use of the same by plaintiffs in any manner.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Lathakkumari
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- D/o Madhavi Amma
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sreekala M alias Sreekala Kumari
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- D/o Madhavi Amma
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vinod Kumar.V
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o Vikraman Nair
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Priyanka V.R
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- W/o Vinod Kumar.V
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of partition deed No.3328/1997, Copy of Partition deed No.4290/2018, Property Tax Receipts, Commission report and sketch
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M. Unnikrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint D schedule pathway.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs had established their case warranting the grant of reliefs sought for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of partition deed No.3328/1997 dated 21/10/1997 establishing ownership and division of property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of partition deed No.4290/2018 dated 27/12/2018 confirming the partition of remaining property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Property tax receipts evidencing payment for the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Exts.A3 to A6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report identifying plaint schedule properties and confirming the condition of the D schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch accompanying the commission report detailing the layout of the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Lathakkumari et al vs Vinod Kumar.V et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Lathakkumari et al vs Vinod Kumar.V et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction