Case Summary
The case involves Nalini and her family suing Malu and her family for a mandatory injunction to demolish illegal construction on their property. The plaintiffs claim ownership of the property based on a will and subsequent inheritances, while the defendants dispute their title.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendants are directed to demolish the structures in plaint C schedule property and to restore it into its original position.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed, and the counter claim was rejected. The plaintiffs were given a mandatory injunction to demolish illegal constructions made by the defendants on their property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the plaintiffs had title and possession over plaint C schedule property, and the defendants had encroached on plaint A schedule property.
The court found the plaintiffs had title and possession over plaint C schedule property, and the defendants had encroached on plaint A schedule property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found the plaintiffs had title and possession over plaint C schedule property, and the defendants had encroached on plaint A schedule property.
The court found the plaintiffs had title and possession over plaint C schedule property, and the defendants had encroached on plaint A schedule property.
Supporting Evidence
The court found that defendants are in possession of plaint B schedule property only and have no right over plaint A and C schedule properties.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: a) The defendants are directed by way of mandatory injunction to demolish the structures in plaint C schedule property and to restore it into its original position. b) The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint A schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nalini
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sajeesh
- Party Age
- 36
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sasi prabha
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sreeja
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Malu
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vidyasagaran
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vidyabhooshan
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vidyadharan
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Will No.54/1979, Assignment deed No.760/1983, Jenmam assignment deed executed by Ammukutty.
Defendants Documents
Electoral cards, Bill No.21063, Bill No.21845, Ration card in the name of Gopalan.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.N Manoj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.P Krishnakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are directed by way of mandatory injunction to demolish the structures in plaint C schedule property and to restore it into its original position.
Evidence:
The defendants are directed by way of mandatory injunction to demolish the structures in plaint C schedule property and to restore it into its original position.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint A schedule property and from committing any wastes therein.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint A schedule property, excluding plaint B schedule property and from committing any wastes therein.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Will
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Will No.54/1979 executed by Ammukutty bequeathing plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of assignment deed No.760/1983 executed by Kakkadath Karthyani in favour of Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Jenmam assignment deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Jenmam assignment deed executed by Ammukutty in favour of Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Plaintiffs provided oral evidence through PW1.
Reference:
Document Type:
Electoral Card
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Electoral card issued by Kozhikode corporation to K Gopalan and K Malu.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Electoral Card
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Electoral card issued by Kozhikode corporation to K Gopalan and K Malu.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Electoral Card
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Electoral card issued by Kozhikode corporation to K Gopalan and others.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Proceeding
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Proceeding of Corporation Commissioner of Kozhikode.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Bill
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Bill issued by Kozhikode Corporation to Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Bill
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Bill issued by Kozhikode Corporation to Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.B5(a)
Document Type:
Bill
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Bill issued by Kozhikode Corporation to Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.B5(b)
Document Type:
Bill
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Bill issued by Kozhikode Corporation to Nambidi Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Ration Card
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Original ration card in the name of Gopalan.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Notice for vaccination issued by Health Inspector of Kozhikode Corporation in the name of Malu.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed by Adv.K Naseema, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission plan filed by Adv.K Naseema, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed by Adv.K Naseema, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed by Adv.K Naseema, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Survey plan filed by Adv.K Naseema, Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed by Adv.George PP.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission plan filed by Adv.George PP.
Reference:
Ext.C4(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Nalini et al vs Malu et al regarding mandatory injunction and other connected reliefs.
Case Code Year
Case between Nalini et al vs Malu et al regarding mandatory injunction and other connected reliefs.