Case Summary
The plaintiffs, including Nirmala Ramankutty, are seeking a mandatory injunction against the defendants, Zahida Crockery and others, regarding their access to a common area in a commercial building. The dispute revolves around the defendants allegedly trespassing on the plaintiffs' common property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 shall remove the lock and chain installed by defendant No. 1 over plaint B schedule common area within 1 month.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs have proven their shared rights to the common area and the defendants' actions were found to infringe upon those rights.
The plaintiffs have proven their shared rights to the common area and the defendants' actions were found to infringe upon those rights.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows, 1. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 shall remove the lock and chain installed by defendant No. 1 over plaint B schedule common area within 1 month.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Nirmala Ramankutty (67 years)
Karuna, Ravipuram road, Kochi – 682 016
N.M.Vijayan (79 years)
Shree, Judge mukku, Thrikkakara, Kochi
N.M.Bharathan (84 years)
F2, K.S.Mansion, Azhakantra Lane, Ponoth road, Kochi – 682 017
Mini Prabhakaran (63 years)
Nirmala Nivas, Thiruvambadi, Thrissur – 1
Praveen Prabhakar (40 years)
Nirmala Nivas, Thiruvambadi, Thrissur -1
Defendants
Zahida Crockery (63 years)
M.G road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 016
Najeema (38 years)
M.G.road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 016
Naseera (35 years)
M.G.road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 016
S.A.Jaleel (Age not specified years)
M.G road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 16
Danny (Age not specified years)
M.G.road, Ernakulam, Kochi – 682 016
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 shall remove the lock and chain installed by the defendant No. 1 over plaint B schedule common area within 1 month.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows, 1.Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 shall remove the lock and chain installed by defendant No. 1 over plaint B schedule common area within 1 month.
Relief Type:
Execution of Orders
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff entitled to execute the removal of the lock and chain through court process if the defendants fail to comply.
Evidence:
In the absence of defendant Nos. 1 to 3, removing the lock and chain within the stipulated period, the plaintiff shall be entitled to get the same executed through the process of this court.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff entitled for the costs of the suits from defendant Nos. 1 to 3.
Evidence:
Plaintiff shall be entitled for the costs of the suits from defendant Nos. 1 to 3.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original power of attorney for the first plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Power of attorney for the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Partition deed no. 351/84 of Ernakulam SRO establishing ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Judgment in OS 1683/97 of Munsiff Court, Ernakulam concerning the same defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Certified copy in AS 243/01 of Hon’ble II Additional District Court, Ernakulam concerning the same defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Certified copy in RSA 391/04 of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala concerning the same defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the letter issued by the 1st plaintiff to the 1st defendant requesting key access.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of the document no. 885/12 of Ernakulam SRO regarding ownership claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Photograph related to the case, possibly showing the disputed area.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report filed interpreting the layout and access of the disputed area.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch accompanying the commission report identifying the disputed property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Oral depositions of witnesses PW1 to PW3 providing testimony related to the case.
Reference: