Case Summary
N. Mayadevi, aged 78, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against Shiju @ Thampi, Sini T.V, and Sheela regarding her properties. The defendants are allegedly encroaching on her land and obstructing her enjoyment of the same.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing and causing damage to the properties.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from trespassing on her properties and prohibiting them from causing any damage or waste.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff has established her ownership and possession of the properties without any contradictory evidence from the defendants.
The plaintiff has established her ownership and possession of the properties without any contradictory evidence from the defendants.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff has established her ownership and possession of the properties without any contradictory evidence from the defendants.
The plaintiff has established her ownership and possession of the properties without any contradictory evidence from the defendants.
Supporting Evidence
There is no evidence on record to counter this evidence tendered by the PW1. The PW1 has also deposed that the defendants are causing hardship to her by preventing her from entering upon the plaint scheduled properties.
Judgment Evidence:
The suit is decreed as follows: The defendants and their men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint A and B schedule properties and causing damage to the coconut trees and banana trees situated therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- N. Mayadevi
- Party Age
- 78
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shiju @ Thampi
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sini T.V
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sheela
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Nil
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K. Mohammed Rafeeq
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Amarnath R. Lal
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- E.P Sanaldev
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P.B Pradeep
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Vishnu Pradeep
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint A and B schedule properties and causing damage to the coconut trees and banana trees situated therein.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint A and B schedule properties and causing damage to the coconut trees and banana trees situated therein and from committing any acts of waste and mischief thereon to the peaceful enjoyment of the plaint A property by the plaintiff.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from encroaching into the plaint A schedule property and committing any kind of waste therein.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by way of decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from encroaching into the plaint A schedule property and from committing any kind of waste thereon and from doing anything detrimental to the right, possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule properties by the plaintiffs.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between N. Mayadevi vs Shiju @ Thampi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between N. Mayadevi vs Shiju @ Thampi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction