Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Rajendramany, Jijesh.S.R., and Jithu.S.R., filed a suit against the Secretary of Kollam Corporation for encroachment and to fix property boundaries. They claimed that the Corporation attempted unauthorized construction impacting their inherited properties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish the alleged encroachment or the demolition of the compound wall. Consequently, the suit was dismissed.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs did not prove the allegations of encroachment or unlawful demolition due to lack of evidence.
The plaintiffs did not prove the allegations of encroachment or unlawful demolition due to lack of evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs did not prove the allegations of encroachment or unlawful demolition due to lack of evidence.
The plaintiffs did not prove the allegations of encroachment or unlawful demolition due to lack of evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs have not adduced satisfactory evidence to establish the existence of an eastern boundary wall for item No.1 property or its alleged demolition by the defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajendramany
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jijesh.S.R.
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o Late
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jithu.S.R
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o Late
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Secretary, Corporation, Kollam
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 357/98, Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3409/2000, Land Tax Receipt.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- S.Sivaraj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- D.Ushakumari
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V.S.Devika
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Moha Prasad Mohan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- G.R. Deepulal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Mini P. Daniel
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Remya Reghupal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Prayed to restrain defendant from any construction on properties.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiffs are not entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from making any construction of drainage by encroaching any portions of item No.1 and 2 of plaint schedule property or altering its boundaries, and from committing any act of waste therein.
Relief Type:
Fixation of Boundary
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Requested to fix the eastern boundary of plaint schedule item No.1.
Evidence:
In this case, there is no commission report showing that the public road belonging to corporation was included in the schedule, measured separately, and the plaintiffs' property boundary was fixed accordingly.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 357/98, establishing ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3409/2000, establishing ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Land Tax Receipt to demonstrate tax payments and ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Land Tax Receipt to demonstrate tax payments and ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Mahazar prepared to document the condition of the property and boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report prepared and submitted by Advocate Commissioner Liji Pushpangathan.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Sketch and Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch and report prepared and submitted by Surveyor Kishanchanth.S.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Boundary Dispute
Case Code
Case between Rajendramany et al vs Secretary, Corporation, Kollam regarding Fixation of Boundary and Injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Rajendramany et al vs Secretary, Corporation, Kollam regarding Fixation of Boundary and Injunction.