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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 356 OF 2014

Case between Maniparambil Narayanan vs Maniparambil Ayyappan regarding injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR
Judge
Sri. Jankish Narayanan
Order Date
2019-11-29
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Maniparambil Narayanan, the plaintiff, filed a suit against his brother Maniparambil Ayyappan, the defendant, seeking a perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant from obstructing the use of a path and from taking water from a well situated on the defendant's property. The plaintiff claims rights to use both the path and the well as easements.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting him the right of easement over a path and the right to take water from the defendant's well. The defendant is restrained from obstructing these rights.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from causing obstruction to the user of the way and from taking water from the well.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established his right of easement by grant and prescription according to the documents presented.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: The defendant and his men are restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from causing any obstruction to the user of the way having an extent of 1.20 meter on extreme southern side of the defendant's property by the plaintiff and also restrained from taking water from the Well in the defendant's property by the plaintiff.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Maniparambil Narayanan (66 years) Kanmanam amsom, desom and post, Tirur Taluk, 676 556

Defendants

Maniparambil Ayyappan (75 years) Kanmanam amsom, desom and post, Tirur Taluk, 676 556

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is granted a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from causing obstruction to the user of the way.
Evidence:
Therefore, I hold a view that plaintiff has cause of action for filing the suit. Thus, the plaintiff is entitled to get a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from causing any obstruction to user of the way having an extent of 1.20 meter on extreme southern side of the defendant's property.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendant is restrained from constructing a wall or fencing that would block the plaintiff's right of way.
Evidence:
The defendant and his men are further restrained, by way of permanent prohibitory injunction, from constructing wall or fencing on his property in order to block the above way.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to recover costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
So, the plaintiff is entitled to realise the cost of the suit from the defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Jenm Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to establish the plaintiff's ownership and right over the A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Jenm Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the stipulation for the property assigned to the defendant and claims regarding the right of way.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Jenm Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the original ownership of the A and B schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Jenm Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Presented by the defendant to dispute the existence and usability of the B schedule way.
Reference:
Ext.B1 to B9
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provided findings and observations about the properties and the existence of the way claimed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.C1 to C6

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases