Case Summary
The case involves a dispute over property rights and the use of a pathway. The plaintiff claims that the defendants are attempting to widen a pathway by trespassing on her property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing and widening the pathway.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing on the plaintiff's property and from widening the pathway.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence establishing her title and possession over the property.
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence establishing her title and possession over the property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence establishing her title and possession over the property.
The plaintiff provided sufficient evidence establishing her title and possession over the property.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of PW1 shows that defendants are attempting to induct strangers in the plaint schedule properties and trying to widen the pathway by trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property. This evidence remains unrebutted.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows:- 1 The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property and widening plaint schedule item No.2 pathway, by destroying the boundary kayyala and committing any waste therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajamma V R
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sajikumar M T
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rajendran
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Sale deed No.2720/2021, Tax receipt dated 01.08.2023.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P. Satheesh Chandran Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- T.S Raju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from trespassing on the plaint schedule property and widening the pathway.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The defendants are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property and widening plaint schedule item No.2 pathway, by destroying the boundary kayyala and committing any waste therein.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to get the cost of the suit from defendants and their assets.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is entitled to get the cost of the suit from defendants and their assets.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Sale deed No.2720/2021 of the SRO, Kanjirappally, produced to establish title and possession over the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt dated 01.08.2023 corresponding to Ext A1, used to support the plaintiff's claim of possession.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Mahazar prepared by Commissioner to provide evidence regarding the status of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch prepared by Commissioner to assist in understanding the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2023