Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 135 OF 2016

Case between Saffiya. A et al vs Saifudheen et al regarding declaration and injunction.

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR
Judge
Smt. VINCY.T.V.,B.A, LL.B., MUNSIFF
Order Date
2017-02-28
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, led by Saffiya. A, claim absolute ownership and possession of a property they inherited from their predecessor, Palappetty Mohamedkutty. They seek a declaration of their rights and an injunction against the defendants, who contest the plaintiffs' ownership and have allegedly obstructed their enjoyment of the property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiffs by declaring their absolute property rights over the plaint schedule property and restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession. The defendants are also ordered to pay the costs of the suit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Perpetual prohibitory injunction against the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs provided credible evidence of their ownership and peaceful possession over the property for more than 30 years.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: It is hereby declare that the plaintiffs are having absolute jenm right and valid possession over the plaint A schedule property. The defendants are hereby restrained by a perpetual prohibitory injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs in plaint A schedule property.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Saffiya. A (78 years) Rahiya Nivas, Thekkummury, Tirur Taluk. Rasia (53 years) Rahiya Nivas, Thekkummury, Tirur Taluk. Rahiya (48 years) Rahiya Nivas, Thekkummury, Tirur Taluk. Firoz (45 years) Rahiya Nivas, Thekkummury, Tirur Taluk. Rajula (42 years) Palappetty House, Kvilakkad Post, Purathur, Tirur Taluk, Pin; 676 102.

Defendants

Saifudheen (55 years) Abdu Rahiman (45 years) Abdul Azeez (50 years) Hyderali (58 years) Abdul Khader (58 years)

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are declared to have absolute jenm right and valid possession over the plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
It is hereby declare that the plaintiffs are having absolute jenm right and valid possession over the plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained by a perpetual prohibitory injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
The defendants are hereby restrained by a perpetual prohibitory injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs in plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants are directed to pay the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
Defendants are hereby directed to pay costs of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiffs' claim of absolute jenm right and valid possession over the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Purchase Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a conclusive proof which legally prescribes absolute jenm right to Palappetty Mohamedkutty.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Certified copy of Final decree
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the plaintiffs' historical claim to the property by showing the outcome of previous partition proceedings.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Kanam Assignment Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is part of the evidence showing the assignment of property rights to the predecessor of the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The oral evidence presented by the plaintiffs was deemed cogent and reliable to support their claim.
Reference:

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases