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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 377/2016

Case between M R Harikumar vs State of Kerala et al regarding Permanent Prohibitory Injunction

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany
Order Date
2025-09-12
Duration
approximately-9 years 6 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M R Harikumar, the plaintiff, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the State of Kerala and other defendants to prevent the demolition of his building, which he claims was owned by his late father. The defendants argue that they have the right to demolish the building to widen the road, asserting that the plaintiff has no title over the property.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove his ownership of the plaint schedule property. The suit was dismissed with costs.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff had failed to demonstrate ownership of the building, and the defendants presented valid documents showing their rights.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence from the above discussion, court is satisfied that plaintiff has failed to prove his case. The suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

M R Harikumar (56 years) Kesava Vilasam, Glass Factory Road, Rajagiri P O, Kalamassery, Thrikkakkara North Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam-683104

Defendants

State of Kerala represented by its Secretary to the Department of Public Works (Age not specified years) Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram District Collector, Ernakulam (Age not specified years) Collectorate, Civil Lane, Kakkanadu, Ernakulam Assistant Executive Engineer, PWD Roads Sub Division (Age not specified years) Thrikkakkara P O, Kochi P A Razia (Age not specified years) White way house, Orumanoor, Thrissur

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against demolishing the plaint schedule building.
Evidence:
The court is satisfied that plaintiff has failed to prove his case.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Professional tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Professional tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Demand Notice for Professional Tax
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Demand Notice for Professional Tax
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Demand Notice for Professional Tax
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Demand Notice for Professional Tax
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: KSEB Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: KSEB Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: KSEB Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: BSNL Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: BSNL Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: BSNL Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type: BSNL Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: BSNL Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: BSNL Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the plaintiff's claim of possession and use of the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To evidence the notice issued by the defendants attempting to evict the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A16
Document Type: Basic Tax Register Copy
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To argue ownership and claim legal standing in relation to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A17
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
To argue ownership and claim legal standing in relation to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A18
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To demonstrate the legal basis for actions taken regarding the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Undertaking
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show that the 4th defendant agreed to surrender land for public development.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To establish the 4th defendant's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show official communication regarding land demarcation.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To establish representation on behalf of the 4th defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To demonstrate the historical transfer of property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To further support the ownership claim of the 4th defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type: Basic Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type: Corporation Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type: Corporation Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B16
Document Type: Corporation Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B17
Document Type: Corporation Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To show taxation records supporting the 4th defendant's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B18

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Fri, 03/04/2016 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

State Government

Similar Cases