Case Summary
Manikkoth Shabin is the plaintiff who filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against Fathima, the first defendant. The case involves a dispute over the use of property that the plaintiff has been occupying under a license agreement.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for permanent prohibitory injunction, stating that the plaintiff, being a trespasser, cannot seek injunction against the true owner.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff was found to be a trespasser as the licence agreement had expired.
The plaintiff was found to be a trespasser as the licence agreement had expired.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff was found to be a trespasser as the licence agreement had expired.
The plaintiff was found to be a trespasser as the licence agreement had expired.
Supporting Evidence
An injunction cannot be issued in favour of a trespasser or a person who gained unlawful possession, as against the owner.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs of the defendants.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Manikkoth Shabin
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Fathima
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of licence agreement dated 01.01.2020, Report of Malayala Manorama Daily.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.P.G.Sreejith
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.M.Vinod Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants to protect his possession of the property.
Evidence:
Considering the same, I am of the view that the plaintiff cannot seek injunction against the true owner since the status of the plaintiff is of a trespasser.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Licence agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff provided a photocopy of the licence agreement to show his entitlement to use the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The report was marked as evidence to support the plaintiff's claims.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Manikkoth Shabin vs Fathima regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Manikkoth Shabin vs Fathima regarding permanent prohibitory injunction