Case Summary
Pathorse, the plaintiff, is seeking an injunction to prevent the defendants, Ambily M B and Asha M B, from trespassing on his property and demolishing a structure. The property in dispute involves a portion adjacent to the public road, claimed by the plaintiff to be his.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's application for an injunction against the defendants, allowing them to continue their construction work.
Key Reasoning:
The court found no evidence of irreparable injury to the plaintiff and determined that the construction work of the defendants should not be obstructed.
The court found no evidence of irreparable injury to the plaintiff and determined that the construction work of the defendants should not be obstructed.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found no evidence of irreparable injury to the plaintiff and determined that the construction work of the defendants should not be obstructed.
The court found no evidence of irreparable injury to the plaintiff and determined that the construction work of the defendants should not be obstructed.
Supporting Evidence
If injunction is not granted, no irreparable injury would be caused to the petitioner. However, if injunction is granted, the construction work to be done at the respondent’s property would be affected.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, I.A.2/2025 is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Pathorse
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ambily M B
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Asha M B
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K S Asif
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Nithin Sunny Alex
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioner requested to restrain the defendants from trespassing and demolishing the Kallukattu.
Evidence:
I.A.2/2025 is dismissed
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Commission report and Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The court used this document to understand the layout and boundaries of the properties involved.
Reference:
Ext.C1 series
Case Classification
Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2025