Case Summary
The plaintiff, Rishikesan Nair, seeks a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Omana and Manoj Kumar, to prevent them from demolishing a compound wall and trespassing on his property. The defendants contest the plaintiff's claims.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from demolishing the compound wall and trespassing on the plaintiff's property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence proved his entitlement to the injunction.
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence proved his entitlement to the injunction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence proved his entitlement to the injunction.
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence proved his entitlement to the injunction.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff’s unchallenged evidence proves his case and he is entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction as sought for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs restraining the defendants and their henchmen by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from demolishing the eastern compound wall of the plaint A schedule property which is the western boundary of plaint B schedule pathway and from trespassing into the same and grabbing a portion of the plaint A schedule property for widening the pathway to make it a cartable road.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rishikesan Nair
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Omana
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Manoj Kumar
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified Copy of Sale Deed No.5283/1994 of SRO, Pattom, Copy of Land Tax Receipt
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. K.O. Asokan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Manjila Viswakarma.V.M.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Kariyam M. Santhoshkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from demolishing the eastern compound wall and trespassing on the property.
Evidence:
the suit is decreed with costs restraining the defendants and their henchmen by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from demolishing the eastern compound wall of the plaint A schedule property
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed No.5283/1994 establishing plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document proving the tax payment related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report assessing the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
A rough sketch accompanying the commission report which details the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Rishikesan Nair vs Omana et al regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Rishikesan Nair vs Omana et al regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction