Case Summary
The case involves plaintiffs Nitha Shaji, her minor children Meenakshi and Krishnananda, who claim ownership of a property in Nadama Village. They sought an injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with their possession of the property, which they allege is being wrongly claimed by the government.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The western boundary of plaint A schedule property is fixed as the red line starting from the south-western point of the plot.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiffs, fixing the western boundary of their property and preventing the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs established title and possession of the property within well-demarcated boundary walls.
Plaintiffs established title and possession of the property within well-demarcated boundary walls.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiffs established title and possession of the property within well-demarcated boundary walls.
Plaintiffs established title and possession of the property within well-demarcated boundary walls.
Supporting Evidence
The report and sketch by the advocate commissioner confirms the plaintiffs’ continuous possession and proper boundary wall setup which substantiates their claim.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows; 1. The western boundary of plaint A schedule property is fixed as the red line starting from the south-western point of the plot shown as B1-1 till the north-western point of A1-1, having a side measurement of 8.30 meters.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nitha Shaji
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Meenakshi
- Party Age
- 16
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Krishnananda
- Party Age
- 11
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- State of Kerala
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Deputy Director of Survey and Land Records
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Village Officer, Nadama Village Office
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Tahsildar (Land Records), Kanayannur Taluk
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Partition deed No. 1254/2006, Certified copy of Land tax receipt No. 4729203, Certified copy of Sale deed No. 1265/62.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K C Eldho
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Jijo Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sindhu Elias K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Mallenathan M
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Additional Government Pleader
- Appearance Type
- Government Pleader
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's possession of the property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are restrained from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of plaint A schedule property or encroaching into plaint A schedule property or demolishing its compound wall.
Relief Type:
Boundary Fixation
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The western boundary of the plaint A schedule property is fixed.
Evidence:
The western boundary of plaint A schedule property is fixed as the red line starting from the south-western point of the plot shown as B1-1 till the north-western point of A1-1, having a side measurement of 8.30 meters.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiffs' ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt was produced to substantiate the plaintiffs' payment of land tax.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides the original title of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Application
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This application was submitted to the Tahasildar regarding property issues.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice under Section 80 CPC was issued to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Reply Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This reply notice from the Survey Deputy Director addresses the plaintiffs' concerns.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Final report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report was submitted by the advocate commissioner regarding the measurement of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This sketch illustrates the measured boundaries of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Oral testimony from plaintiffs and defendants regarding the case.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Boundary Dispute
Case Code
Case between Nitha Shaji et al vs State of Kerala et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Nitha Shaji et al vs State of Kerala et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction