Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 799/2020

Case between P. K. Babu vs P.K. Narayanan @ Chinnan regarding declaration, fixation of boundary and permanent injunction

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-10-31
Duration
approximately-5 years
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

P. K. Babu filed a suit against his brother P.K. Narayanan and others for a declaration of his title and fixation of the property boundaries, as well as a permanent injunction to stop Narayanan from obstructing his construction. The case revolves around familial property issues following the death of their father.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, confirming his ownership rights and delineating property boundaries. The injunction against the defendant was also granted.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree declaring that the first defendant has no right over the plaint A schedule property and a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction was granted.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, confirming his ownership rights and delineating property boundaries. The injunction against the defendant was also granted.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court upheld the plaintiff's title based on valid documentation and established possession.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The learned counsel for the plaintiff in OS 799/2020 has argued that from the execution of Exhibit B1 in the year 1987, the plaintiff had been in possession of the plaint A schedule property and was enjoying the same undisputedly.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the OS 799/2020 is to be decreed as follows: a) It is declared that the first defendant in OS 799/2020 has no right over the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020. b) A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the first defendant in OS 799/2020, his men or agents from obstructing the plaintiff or his men or agents or successors in interest from making any construction in the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020. c) The southern boundary of the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020 is fixed as noted in Exhibit C2(a) sketch.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
P. K. Babu
Party Age
61
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P.K. Narayanan @ Chinnan
Party Age
68
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P.K. Vilasani
Party Age
64
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P. K. Subhashini
Party Age
65
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Death Certificate issued by Kochi Municipal Corporation, Certified copy of Sale Deed bearing No. 806/1979, Draft of the Partition Deed (2016), Certified copy of Settlement Deed bearing No. 3969/1987, Property Tax Receipt.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No. 3969/1987, Land Tax Receipt, Possession Certificate, Building Tax Receipt.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K. K Sajikumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Jimmy George
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
A. Balagopalan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Pearl K. Davis
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
A. Rajagopalan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sandhya C. Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Dharmya M.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Gouri Balagopal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Ralitzine Mendez
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Decree declaring that the first defendant has no right over the plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
It is declared that the first defendant in OS 799/2020 has no right over the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the first defendant from obstructing the plaintiff from making any construction.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the first defendant in OS 799/2020, his men or agents from obstructing the plaintiff or his men or agents or successors in interest from making any construction in the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020.
Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Fixation of the southern boundary of the plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
The southern boundary of the plaint A schedule property in OS 799/2020 is fixed as noted in Exhibit C2(a) sketch.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Dismissal of the suit OS 1059/2020.
Evidence:
The OS 1059/2020 is dismissed.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Costs of the suit awarded to the defendant in OS 1059/2020.
Evidence:
The defendant in OS 1059/2020 is entitled to costs of the said suit from the plaintiffs in the OS 1059/2020.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Death Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provided evidence of the death of the plaintiff's father.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Death Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provided evidence of the death of the plaintiff's mother.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Served as a basis for the plaintiff's claim over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Draft of Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrated evidence of intentions for partitioning property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof; illustrated the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof; illustrated the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provided evidence of the claims over property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Draft of Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof; demonstrated proposed divisions of property.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provided evidence supporting the defendant's claims over property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Possession Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provided evidence of the defendant's claimed possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Possession Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provided evidence of the defendant's claimed possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as evidence supporting the defendant's claim over property.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Subject to objection; involved in tax discussion.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type: Building Permit
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provided evidence of permission for construction activities.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Served as evidence in contesting ownership claims.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type: Relationship Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Subject to objection; involved in establishing family ties.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provided findings upon property measurement.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Illustrated the results of the commission.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Illustrated the condition and state of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b) series
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provided findings upon property measurement.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Survey Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Illustrated the results of the commission.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between P. K. Babu vs P.K. Narayanan @ Chinnan regarding declaration, fixation of boundary and permanent injunction
Case Code Year
Case between P. K. Babu vs P.K. Narayanan @ Chinnan regarding declaration, fixation of boundary and permanent injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam, Kochi
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Wed, 01/01/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Wed, 10/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Mini Jolly vs Noel et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Jobin Thomas vs Thrikkakara Municipality et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between His Holiness Shrimad Raghavendra Thirtha Swami et al vs Venkatesh Shenoy et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Santhosh P @ Santhoshkumar vs Suresh P.S, Mallika Shanmughan regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kochuthressia Thomas vs Gopalan, Kalidasan regarding recovery of possession and injunction.
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Defendant Won