Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 329/2018

Case between Noushad vs Rehumath et al regarding Declaration and Injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Judge
Smt. Ragi.S.
Order Date
2025-07-15
Duration
approximately-7 years 0 days
Case Closed
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Noushad, is seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants regarding a pathway that he claims to have the right to use. The defendants, including Rehumath, Bijina, Muhammed Shah, Francis Sebastian Fernandez, and Jiji Francis, are contesting this claim.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court adjudicated in favor of the plaintiff, establishing his right of easement by grant over the B schedule pathway. The defendants were ordered to cease obstructing the plaintiff’s access to this pathway.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants' obstruction of the B schedule pathway.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court adjudicated in favor of the plaintiff, establishing his right of easement by grant over the B schedule pathway. The defendants were ordered to cease obstructing the plaintiff’s access to this pathway.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established a legal right of easement by grant over the pathway through clear documentary evidence and usage.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established a legal right of easement by grant over the pathway through clear documentary evidence and usage.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has established, by clear documentary evidence, that an easement by grant was conveyed in his favour through Ext.A1 deed.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit decreed with costs as follows: 1. It is declared that the plaintiff has right of easement by grant over the plaint B schedule pathway and the sale deed Nos. 1173/2014, 2780/2014 and 1594/2017 of Kollam SRO, do not bind the plaintiff’s right over the B schedule pathway.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Noushad
Party Age
47
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rehumath
Party Age
41
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Bijina
Party Age
35
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Muhammed Shah
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Francis Sebastian Fernandez
Party Age
54
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jiji Francis
Party Age
47
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1172/2014 of Kollam SRO, Original Land Tax Receipt, Copy of Sale Deed No. 1173/2014, Copy of Sale Deed No. 2780/2014
Defendants Documents
Photocopy of Sale Deed No. 1594/2017, Land Tax Receipt, Building Tax Receipt issued from Kollam Corporation

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
S.Sheejakumari
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
N.S.Unmesh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Preeja.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K.S.Rajiv Thevally
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff's right of easement by grant over the B schedule pathway is recognized.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiff’s easement right over the B schedule pathway be preserved and protected.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants 4 and 5 are permanently restrained from obstructing the plaintiff’s access through the B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
The defendants have no right to obstruct the easement right of the plaintiff over the B schedule way.
Relief Type: Cost
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize costs of the proceedings from the 4th and 5th defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize costs of the proceedings from the 4th and 5th defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1172/2014 of Kollam SRO, establishing the plaintiff's easement by grant over the B schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Land Tax Receipt, relevant to property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1173/2014, related to the fraudulent transfer that affects the plaintiff's rights.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 2780/2014, related to the property transfer affecting the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1594/2017, related to the transfer impacting the plaintiff's rights.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Photocopy of Sale Deed No. 1594/2017, subject to proof, relevant for the defendants' ownership claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Land Tax Receipt, pertinent to the property claimed by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Building Tax Receipt issued from Kollam Corporation, relevant for the defendants' property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Receipt issued from Kollam Corporation, relevant for the defendants' claims.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission Report prepared and submitted by Advocate Commissioner, detailing property boundaries and access.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Mahazar
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Mahazar prepared and submitted by Advocate Commissioner, relevant for property description.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Rough Sketch prepared by Advocate Commissioner, illustrating property layout.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Noushad vs Rehumath et al regarding Declaration and Injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Noushad vs Rehumath et al regarding Declaration and Injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Kollam
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Case Filed
Wed, 04/11/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 07/15/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Vijayendran, Chithra vs Yamunadevi regarding review of order
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Navasudeen.S vs Sira Group regarding review of an earlier order
Court of the Munsiff, Kollam
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sajeev vs T.Unnikrishna Pillai regarding setting aside an exparte decree.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Gopakumar vs K.S.Abdul Manaf regarding Realisation of Money
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM.
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Bank of India vs Shibina. S et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won