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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 118/2019

Case between Mr. M.J Mathew et al vs President, Kadavill Court Owners Association regarding declaration and consequential injunction

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2024-08-17
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, who are owners of an apartment called Kadavill Court, filed a suit against the president and secretary of the Kadavill Court Owners Association. The suit challenges the defendants' arbitrary rules regarding car parking for the apartment owners.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as the Kadavill Court Owners Association was not made a party in the case, which was deemed essential. The plaintiffs were seeking relief for all owners of the apartment without complying with procedural requirements.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The suit could not proceed as the essential party, the Kadavill Court Owners Association, was not included.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is dismissed. Parties are directed to suffer their respective costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Mr. M.J Mathew (58 years years) Apt. No. 2-A, KADAVIL COURT, Ernakulam, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk – 682 018 Mr. Raveendran (46 years years) Apt. No. 5-A, KADAVIL COURT, Ernakulam, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk – 682 018 Mrs. Seena Jose (44 years years) Apt. No. 7B, KADAVIL COURT, Ernakulam, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk – 682 018

Defendants

President, KADAVIL COURT Owners Association (Age not specified years) Arangath cross road, Ernakulam – 682 018 Secretary, KADAVIL COURT Owners Association (Age not specified years) cross road, Ernakulam – 682 018

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Refused
Description:
A declaration that notice dated 04.01.19 issued by the defendants is null and void.
Evidence:
I am of the opinion that the suit cannot be decreed in favour of the plaintiff as sought for.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
To pass a decree of Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing peaceful possession.
Evidence:
I am of the opinion that the suit cannot be decreed in favour of the plaintiff as sought for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 2887/2010 marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Property Tax Receipt marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Land Tax Receipt marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the Sale Deed No. 905/2018 marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter issued by DCB Bank marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Property Tax Receipt marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Property Tax Receipt.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Notice issued by Kadavil Court Apartment Owners Association marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A9

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Apartment Association

Similar Cases