Case Summary
The case involves P A Sanoj as the plaintiff seeking a declaration of right of way by easement against defendants P K Sreedharan and his sons. The defendants filed a petition for an advocate commissioner to inspect a pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found no merit in the defendants' petition for an advocate commissioner to inspect a pathway. The petition was dismissed and the parties were ordered to bear their respective costs.
Key Reasoning:
The court determined that there was no necessity for further inspection as prior reports had already been submitted and were adequate for consideration.
The court determined that there was no necessity for further inspection as prior reports had already been submitted and were adequate for consideration.
Why Defendant Won:
The court determined that there was no necessity for further inspection as prior reports had already been submitted and were adequate for consideration.
The court determined that there was no necessity for further inspection as prior reports had already been submitted and were adequate for consideration.
Supporting Evidence
The present petition is highly belated. I find no reason to appoint an advocate commissioner for local inspection after the evidence of PW1.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, Petition is dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, parties are directed to bear their respective costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- P A Sanoj
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o Late P K Anujan alias Aniyan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- P K Sreedharan
- Party Age
- 83
- Relation
- S/o Late Kakki
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Maju
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o P K Sreedharan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Manu
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o P K Sreedharan
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P Suresh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sibi Karun
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R Rajesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Karthika S Varma
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Philip T Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Thomas T Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Achu Shubha Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nitya R Amala Purushothaman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Amrutha Ramesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sidharth R Wariyar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Amalu Joy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Request for appointment of advocate commissioner to inspect the pathway.
Evidence:
I find no merit in the above petition.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commissioner Report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Report of the advocate commissioner was marked to ascertain the status of the pathway.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Title deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Plaintiff's documents supporting the claim of right of way through the pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A1 to A3
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between P A Sanoj vs P K Sreedharan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and declaration of right of way by easement.
Case Code Year
Case between P A Sanoj vs P K Sreedharan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and declaration of right of way by easement.