Case Summary
The case involves a dispute over property ownership between Manju and Sobha. Manju claims that she holds rightful ownership of the property and seeks to prevent Sobha from trespassing or damaging it.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and from cutting trees or committing any waste therein.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from trespassing or causing any harm to the property in question.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and possession was found to be credible and unchallenged.
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and possession was found to be credible and unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and possession was found to be credible and unchallenged.
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and possession was found to be credible and unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
From the oral and documentary evidence adduced from the side of plaintiff, the plaintiffs’ ownership and possession over the plaint schedule property is proved by Exts.A1 and A2 and the oral evidence of PW1. The evidence of plaintiff remains unchallenged. There is no reason to disbelieve PW1.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: (i) The defendant is restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and from cutting trees or committing any waste therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Manju
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sobha
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
True copy of sale deed No.2263/2009, tax receipt dated 04/02/2017
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. B.Vijaya kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Arun kumar.D.R
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and cutting trees.
Evidence:
From the available evidence, the plaintiff is entitled for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and from cutting trees or committing any waste therein.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Cost of the suit to be realised from the defendant.
Evidence:
Considering the facts and circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to realise costs of the suit from the defendant.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of sale deed No.2263/2009 dated 03/07/2009 proving the plaintiff's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt dated 04/02/2017 confirming the plaintiff's payment of tax for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission report and Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report and rough sketch ascertain the nature of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
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 Manju vs Sobha regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Manju vs Sobha regarding permanent prohibitory injunction