Case Summary
The plaintiff, Nicemol Nishad, claims ownership of a residential property and seeks a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Sivadasan and Mohanan, who have unlawfully attempted to trespass and encroach upon her property. The defendants contest the plaintiff's claims and assert ownership of a strip of land adjacent to her property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants to prevent them from trespassing on the plaintiff's property or interfering with her possession. The defendants were also directed to pay the costs of the suit.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established lawful ownership and possession of the property in question.
The plaintiff established lawful ownership and possession of the property in question.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established lawful ownership and possession of the property in question.
The plaintiff established lawful ownership and possession of the property in question.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff contends that originally the plaint schedule property was part and parcel of property owned by one Gauri and after her death, the legal heirs developed the property owned by her and demarcated into various plots and later on sold the properties. From the assignees of the legal heirs of Gauri, the plaintiff has purchased the property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed on the following terms: Defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property by demolishing any portion of the compound wall on the southern side of the plaint schedule property and from interfering with or causing any obstruction to the plaintiff’s user over the plaint schedule property and from committing any waste therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nicemol Nishad alias Nice Nishad
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sivadasan
- Party Age
- 70
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mohanan
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 637/2017, Certified copy of Sale deed No. 727/2017, Certified copy of Sale deed No. 1745/2017, Tax receipt issued from Thrikkakara North Village Office
Defendants Documents
Original copy of Sale deed No: 1545 of 2014, Certified copy of Judgment in W.P(c)No:21792 of 2017 by the Hon’ble High Court, Ernakulam
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Zakir Hussain
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nikhil K Gopinath
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- C P Pradeep
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Prasanth V C
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Premraj C K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property by demolishing any portion of the compound wall on the southern side of the plaint schedule property and from interfering with or causing any obstruction to the plaintiff’s user over the plaint schedule property and from committing any waste therein.
Relief Type:
Cost
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order directing the defendants to pay the cost of the suit to the plaintiff.
Evidence:
Defendants are directed to pay the cost of the suit to plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no: 637 of 2017 of Edappally SRO
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no: 727 of 2017 of Edappally SRO
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no: 1745 of 2017 of Edappally SRO
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt issued from Thrikkakara North Village Office
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt issued from Thrikkakara North Village Office
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt issued from Thrikkakara North Village Office
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Commission report in OS 240/2013
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Commission report in IA 7789/2017
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Rough Sketch
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Original copy of Sale deed no: 1545 of 2014 of Edappally SRO
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of Judgment in W.P(c)No:21792 of 2017 by the Hon’ble High Court, Ernakulam
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Oral evidence from witnesses presented during the case.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Nicemol Nishad alias Nice Nishad vs Sivadasan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Nicemol Nishad alias Nice Nishad vs Sivadasan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction