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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 20/2024

Case between Mujeeb K.S vs Rafeeq M.A regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-10-25
Duration
approximately-2 years 6 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Mujeeb K.S, entered into a construction agreement with the defendant, Rafeeq M.A, but the defendant failed to carry out the work properly. The plaintiff seeks a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction due to the defendant's unlawful obstruction of construction.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from trespassing and obstructing the construction. The plaintiff is entitled to costs from the defendant.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant from trespassing and obstructing the construction.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: i. The defendant, his men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from obstructing the construction and from doing any kind of act which disturbs the peaceful enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Mujeeb K.S (52 years years) Kaithavelikkakath House, Lissie Hospital Road, Ernakulam North P.O, Thrikkanarvattom Desom, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District – 682 018.

Defendants

Rafeeq M.A (45 years years) Meentharakkal, Thayikkattukara P.O, Ernakulam District, PIN – 683 106.

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant, his men and agents are restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and obstructing construction.
Evidence:
the defendant, his men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from obstructing the construction and from doing any kind of act which disturbs the peaceful enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff.
Relief Type: Cost Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
I am of the opinion that the plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Building Construction Contract
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the agreement related to the construction of a residential building between the plaintiff and the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Building Permit
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This permit was necessary for the construction activities undertaken by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the ownership of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document might pertain to any prior agreements regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Copy of complaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This complaint relates to the issues faced by the plaintiff due to obstruction from the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Copy of acknowledgment Receipt of petition
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document acknowledges the filing of a petition relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A6

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Tue, 04/11/2023 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases