Case Summary
This case involves petitioners P.M. Mathew and Babu Thomas who are seeking a temporary prohibitory injunction against several defendants engaged in quarrying and related activities. The plaintiffs allege that these operations are causing public nuisance and endangering lives in their community.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiffs' application for a temporary prohibitory injunction against the defendants, as it found no sufficient grounds to support the claims of public nuisance.
Key Reasoning:
The defendants demonstrated that they possessed all required permissions and licenses to conduct their quarry operations legally.
The defendants demonstrated that they possessed all required permissions and licenses to conduct their quarry operations legally.
Why Defendant Won:
The defendants demonstrated that they possessed all required permissions and licenses to conduct their quarry operations legally.
The defendants demonstrated that they possessed all required permissions and licenses to conduct their quarry operations legally.
Supporting Evidence
The commission report indicated that the defendants are operating within permissible limits and the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, IA is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- P.M. Mathew
- Party Age
- 76
- Relation
- S/o Late P.M. Mathew
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Babu Thomas
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- S/o Thomas
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s Thomsun Aggregates
- Relation
- Represented by K.V. Abraham
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thomsun Estates Ltd., L.L.P.
- Relation
- Represented by K.V. Abraham
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K.V. Abraham
- Party Age
- 67
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Eliyamma Thomas
- Relation
- W/o Varghese Thomas
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Padmakumar
- Party Age
- 41
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Praveen
- Party Age
- 43
Plaintiffs Documents
Petition filed under Section 91 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Defendants Documents
Various permits and licenses issued by government authorities related to quarrying.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv. K. Karjet
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Benny Jacob
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Arathy K.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv. George Kurian
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Alex J. Edackatttu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Abhijith K.B.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiffs sought a temporary prohibitory injunction against the defendants.
Evidence:
Hence the petition is liable to be dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This judgment of the Hon'ble High Court was referred to in relation to the context of the water tank.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
General Building Permit
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows the details of land development in the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Consent Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Executed consent confirming permission for quarrying for a specified period.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Consent Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Executed consent confirming permission for conducting quarrying activities.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Consent Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Executed consent confirming permission for conducting quarrying activities.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
NOC
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
NOC permitting the 1st defendant to keep explosive materials for blasting.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Letter of intent
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Letter extending the time stipulated for executing lease deed.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Environmental Clearance Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Environmental clearance issued by the appropriate authority for quarrying.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Non Assignment Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Non Assignment Certificate issued for quarry operation permit.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Quarry License
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
License issued for conducting quarry in the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type:
Boundary Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certificate fixing the boundary of the properties for quarrying.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type:
Proceedings
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Proceedings permitting the removal of granite stones.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type:
Consent Variation Order
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Consent variation issued by the pollution control board.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type:
Authorization
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Authorization for engaging in construction and quarrying activities.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type:
Destructive Incident Permission
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Permission for conducting blasting operations.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type:
Possession of Use Document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Possession of use certificate for explosive materials until a certain date.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type:
Quarrying Lease
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Quarrying lease document confirming legal operation.
Reference:
Ext.B17
Document Type:
Technical Report
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Technical report on the quarrying operations and their impacts.
Reference:
Ext.B19
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2024