Case Summary
This case involves Radhakrishnan K N as the petitioner against K K Abraham and others. The petitioner seeks to restrain the defendants from denying common facilities provided to him.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Restraining the defendants from denying the common amenities to the 5th defendant.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court upheld the request of the 5th defendant to restrain the other defendants from denying common amenities.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that denying the amenities would cause irreparable loss to all residents.
The court found that denying the amenities would cause irreparable loss to all residents.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It is pertinent to note that the defendant no. 5 is also a resident of the flat. Already there is an order of temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence it would be fare and just to restrain the defendants no. 1 to 4 from denying the common amenities to the defendant no. 5 in the flat.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Radhakrishnan K N
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K K Abraham
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- S P Mathai
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Cyril Podipara
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jaya George
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Raju Rajasekharan Nair
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sajan A Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P A Rabeez
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Tharakan and George Associates
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
to restrain the defendants no. 1 to 4 from denying the common amenities to the defendant no. 5 in the flat
Evidence:
Hence it would be fare and just to restrain the defendants no. 1 to 4 from denying the common amenities to the defendant no. 5 in the flat.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Denial of common facilities
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2021