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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 580 of 2018

Case between Sakeer Hussain, Muhammed Sadik vs Varuthu regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
Principal Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Rejani Thankappan
Order Date
2024-02-22
Duration
approximately-5 years 7 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Sakeer Hussain and Muhammed Sadik, claim ownership and seek a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant, Varuthu, regarding a pathway. The defendant has previously claimed easement rights over the same pathway.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit filed by the plaintiffs for a permanent prohibitory injunction has been dismissed by the court.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their exclusive right over the property and did not prove attempted conversion by the defendant.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed. No costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Sakeer Hussain (53 years) Manathkuttikkattu House, Vazhakkala, Kakkanad, Ernakulam Muhammed Sadik (51 years) Manathkuttikkattu House, Vazhakkala, Kakkanad, Ernakulam

Defendants

Varuthu (75 years) Parayamthazhath House, Vazhakkala, Kakkanad, Ernakulam

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a permanent prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendant from altering the plaint B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
Thus, the plaintiff has not entitled to get any relief as sought for.
Relief Type: Compensatory Costs
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
The defendant prayed for compensatory costs.
Evidence:
Hence it is found the respective parties shall bear their own costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiffs use this document to establish their title and possession of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Decree
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This decree relates to the prior litigation regarding the right of way through the plaint B schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Judgment
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This judgment discusses the plaintiff's entitlement to the pathway and the conditions of the earlier decree.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The court used this report to assess the physical condition and characteristics of the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
These photographs support the findings of the Advocate Commissioner regarding the plaint B schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Mon, 05/21/2018 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases