Case Summary
Shajan Antony filed a petition for execution of a decree against C.A Shylan. The plaintiff claims that the defendant violated a previous decree by obstructing the installation of a gate on the property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Execution Petition
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The execution petition was dismissed on the basis that the decree does not authorize the erection of a gate.
The execution petition was dismissed on the basis that the decree does not authorize the erection of a gate.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, Execution Petition stands dismissed.
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs
Shajan Antony @ Raphael (57 years years)
Chamminikodath House, Palarivattom, Edappally South Village, Palarivattom P.O, Pin - 682 025, Ernakulam District
Defendants
C.A Shylan (55 years years)
Ward No. 32/304 A, Chamminikodath, Palarivattom P.O, Edappally South Village, Pin - 682 032, Ernakulam District
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Request for a mandatory injunction to install a sliding gate was made but not granted.
Evidence:
Also, in the said decree, the relief for a mandatory injunction was disallowed.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff was granted a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant.
Evidence:
As per the decree, defendant, his men and agents were restrained by permanent prohibitory injunction from causing any obstruction or hindrance to the plaintiff in using the plaint B schedule property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Decree
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court referred to the decree that restrains the defendant from obstructing the plaintiff's use of the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1