Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 703/2018

Case between Pradeep Kumar vs Jenson Nunas regarding perpetual injunction and counter claim for fixation of boundaries

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany
Order Date
2025-06-28
Duration
approximately-7 years 0 days

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Pradeep Kumar, seeks a perpetual injunction against the defendant, Jenson Nunas, who is claiming ownership of a strip of land. The case involves disputes over property boundaries and access rights related to land in Maradu Village.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed partly, restraining the defendant from entering the plaint A schedule property. The counter claim by the defendant is dismissed with costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is restrained by decree of prohibitory injunction from entering into plaint A schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully established his prescriptive rights and possession over the A schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed partly as follows: 1) Defendant is restrained by decree of prohibitory injunction from entering into plaint A schedule property. 2) The defendant is liable to pay costs of suit to plaintiff. In the result, Counter claim is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Pradeep Kumar (44 years years) Krishnalayam, Nettoor P O- 682306, Maradu Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District

Defendants

Jenson Nunas (41 years years) Palliparambil, Nettoor P O- 682306, Maradu Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendant is restrained from entering into plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed partly as follows: Defendant is restrained by decree of prohibitory injunction from entering into plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is liable to pay costs of suit to plaintiff.
Evidence:
The defendant is liable to pay costs of suit to plaintiff.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Plaintiff's claim for mandatory injunction to prevent obstruction was not granted.
Evidence:
Hence plaintiff is not entitled for a injunction as sought for.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Counter claim filed by the defendant was dismissed.
Evidence:
In the result, Counter claim is dismissed with costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to establish the ownership of the plaintiff's mother over the land.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates the transfer of property to the plaintiff by his mother.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Illustrates the layout of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides visual evidence supporting the existence and condition of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Connects the historical ownership of land through Augustine.
Reference:
Ext.A16
Document Type: Release deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the transfer of rights between the heirs of Augustine.
Reference:
Ext.A17
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the sale of property that connects to the ownership dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A18
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provided findings related to the demarcation of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes the defendant's claim of ownership over the disputed property.
Reference:
Ext.B3

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Thu, 06/28/2018 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases