Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 577/2023

Case between Maniyamma.M.S. vs Radhakrishna Pillai.G. et al regarding Injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Judge
Smt. Ragi.S.
Order Date
2025-01-06
Duration
approximately-1 year 6 months
Case Closed
Mon, 01/06/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Maniyamma.M.S., is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent the defendants from trespassing on her property and destroying her compound wall. The defendants include Radhakrishna Pillai.G., Selvan.M, and Swarnamma.S, who are alleged to have attempted to demolish the wall and access the property without permission.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed with costs, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaintiff's property and destroying the compound wall. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs from the defendants.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanently restraining the defendants from trespassing and destroying the property.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed with costs, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaintiff's property and destroying the compound wall. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs from the defendants.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff established her ownership and the defendants' wrongful actions.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff established her ownership and the defendants' wrongful actions.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of PW1 coupled with Ext. A1 to A3 and C1 series would prove the case of the plaintiff. Pleadings and evidence of the plaintiff remains unchallenged.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: i. The defendants and their men are permanently restrained from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property and from destroying the southern compound wall for the purpose of widening the C schedule pathway and from destroying and reducing the width of B schedule way and also from committing any waste therein.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Maniyamma.M.S.
Party Age
64
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Radhakrishna Pillai.G.
Party Age
65
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Selvan.M
Party Age
40
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Swarnamma.S
Party Age
40
Relation
Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1812/1997, Land Tax Receipt, Copy of Location Sketch
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Abhilash.B
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Tomy Joseph
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Thampi.V.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Permanently restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are permanently restrained from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property and from destroying the southern compound wall for the purpose of widening the C schedule pathway and from destroying and reducing the width of B schedule way and also from committing any waste therein.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is also entitled to realise the costs of the suit from the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows that the plaintiff is paying land tax for the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Location Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Illustrates the layout of the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Prepared by the Advocate Commissioner, confirms the boundaries of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1 series

Case Classification

Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Maniyamma.M.S. vs Radhakrishna Pillai.G. et al regarding Injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Maniyamma.M.S. vs Radhakrishna Pillai.G. et al regarding Injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Kollam
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Case Filed
Wed, 06/21/2023 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 01/06/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Sukanya vs Lalitha et al regarding Injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between Ambujakshy vs Sambasivan et al regarding Injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Injunction Defendant Won
Case between Madhavan Pillai vs Harish.M regarding Injunction
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM.
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between P.Sunilkumar vs Radhakrishnan Nair et al regarding Injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Injunction Defendant Won
Case between Vasanthakumari et al vs Divakaran.K et al regarding Injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Injunction Defendant Won