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
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit filed by the plaintiffs for a permanent prohibitory injunction has been dismissed by the court.
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.
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their exclusive right over the property and did not prove attempted conversion by the defendant.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their exclusive right over the property and did not prove attempted conversion by the defendant.
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their exclusive right over the property and did not prove attempted conversion by the defendant.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff has no right to interfere with the defendant’s use as the right of easement has been established in the prior case.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. No costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sakeer Hussain
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Muhammed Sadik
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Varuthu
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copies of Settlement Deed No. 657/1996, decree in A.S No. 36/2012, judgment in A.S No. 36/2012
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.R Vinod
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.S Letha
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Vimal Dev.D
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Joseph Mary Das
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreerekha K.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Pavan Rose Johnson
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Solomon Baby
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A.Balagopal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A.Rajagopal
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M.N Manmadhan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R.Rajesh
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
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)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sakeer Hussain, Muhammed Sadik vs Varuthu regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sakeer Hussain, Muhammed Sadik vs Varuthu regarding permanent prohibitory injunction