Case Summary
The plaintiffs, including P A Jihas and Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd., are involved in a dispute with the defendants over the maintenance of a residential complex. The plaintiffs seek an injunction to prevent the defendants from trespassing and obstructing access to their property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, granting a permanent injunction against the defendants. The defendants are restrained from trespassing onto the plaintiffs' properties and are directed to pay the costs of the suit.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established their case with unchallenged evidence.
The plaintiffs established their case with unchallenged evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs established their case with unchallenged evidence.
The plaintiffs established their case with unchallenged evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff apprehends that defendants have no right to obstruct the ingress and egress of the plaintiff or his family into their private residence (plaint A schedule property) or obstruct the functioning of the 2nd plaintiff to cause impediments to the ongoing project of the 2nd plaintiff in plaint C schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed on the following terms. 1) 1st to 7 defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint A schedule property and preventing the free ingress and egress of the 1st plaintiff or his family.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- P A Jihas
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jewel Homes Pvt. Ltd.
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Edwin Correya
- Party Age
- 67
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Irshan Jaffer
- Party Age
- 33
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vinis Davis
- Party Age
- 42
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Yasar Aravath
- Party Age
- 38
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jignesh Jayendra Vagadia
- Party Age
- 42
Plaintiffs Documents
A1 Power of Attorney executed by the plaintiff in favour of Mr. Mohammed Rafi T M.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Joson Manavalan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V Bharatkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dominic Antony
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Izhar Mohammed
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Abhijith Roy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into plaintiffs' properties and obstructing access.
Evidence:
1)1st to 7 defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint A schedule property and preventing the free ingress and egress of the 1st plaintiff or his family.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing the employees of the 2nd plaintiff from accessing the B schedule property.
Evidence:
2)1st to 7 defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint B schedule property and preventing or obstructing the free ingress and egress of the employees of the 2nd plaintiff to plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing construction and marketing at the C schedule property.
Evidence:
3)1st to 7 defendants are restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into plaint C schedule property and cause any obstruction to the construction as well as marketing work progressing therein.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are directed to pay the costs of the suit to plaintiffs.
Evidence:
4)Defendants are directed to pay costs of the suit to plaintiffs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document authorizes Mr. Mohammed Rafi T.M. to act on behalf of the plaintiff in relation to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A1
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 P A Jihas et al vs Edwin Correya et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between P A Jihas et al vs Edwin Correya et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.