Case Summary
This case involves Radhakrishna Menon, the plaintiff, seeking an injunction against Radhamani Amma and others, the defendants, regarding the obstruction of access to his property. The plaintiff claims a right of easement for passage through the defendants' property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff's access and must remove the fencing obstructing the path.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court upheld the plaintiff's established right of easement by necessity over the pathway.
The court upheld the plaintiff's established right of easement by necessity over the pathway.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. The defendants and persons claiming under them are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the road described in Ext.C3(a) sketch as 'b1' and 'b2'. 2. Defendants shall remove the fencing put up on the northern boundary of plaint A schedule property within one month in the absence of which the plaintiff can remove the same through the process of the court.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Radhakrishna Menon (64 years years)
Peroor house, Vadakekotta, Tripunithura – 682 301
Smitha Venugopal (51 years years)
Nandanam, Tripunithura P.O – 682 301
Defendants
Radhamani Amma (70 years years)
Illathuveettil, Cheppanam desom, Kumbalam village, Kanayannur taluk, Kochi – 682 506
Geetha Devi (47 years years)
Madhusoothanan (45 years years)
Jayaprakash (43 years years)
Krishnakumar (38 years years)
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants and persons claiming under them are restrained from interfering or obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the road described in Ext.C3(a) sketch as 'b' and 'b1'.
Evidence:
The defendants and persons claiming under them are restrained from the interfering all obstructing the plaintiff’s peaceful enjoyments of the road described in Ext.C3(a) sketch as “b1” and “b2”.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants shall remove the fencing put up on the northern boundary of plaint A schedule property within one month.
Evidence:
Defendants shall remove the fencing put up on the northern boundary of plaint A schedule property within one month in the absence of which the plaintiff can remove the same through the process of the court.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is also entitled to the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
Hence the issue as to costs in found in favour of the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Settlement deed no. 2483/1977 of SRO Ernakulam executed by Narayana Menon in favour of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Partition deed no. 1112/54 of SRO Ernakulam.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of partition deed no. 388/05 of SRO Maradu.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no. 391/05 of SRO Maradu.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed no. 2406/05 of SRO.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Power of Attorney executed by the 4th defendant in favour of his wife as document no. 135/04 of SRO, Maradu.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Duplicate copy of Partition deed no. 388/05 of SRO Maradu.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report filed by Adv. K.M.Vikas.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report filed by Adv. K.M.Vikas.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report filed by Adv. Albert Joseph Angamaly.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch prepared by P.S.Sukumar, Private Secretary.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)