Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O S. 41/2017

Case between Shaji vs Thankappan, Chellamma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Judge
Kum. Abhinimol Rajendran
Order Date
2025-11-29
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Shaji, claims a right of way through item No. 3 pathway, which the defendants, Thankappan and Chellamma, have obstructed. The suit involves allegations of illegal obstruction on the pathway leading to the plaintiff's property.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit filed by the plaintiff seeking a mandatory and prohibitory injunction is dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of the claimed pathway.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit filed by the plaintiff seeking a mandatory and prohibitory injunction is dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of the claimed pathway.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to prove a prima facie case for the decree sought.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to prove a prima facie case for the decree sought.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff had failed to prove balance of convenience in his favour.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shaji
Party Age
45
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Thankappan
Party Age
83
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Chellamma
Party Age
75
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale deed No.234/2009, Tax Receipt of Kallara Village Office, Copy of partition deed No.1961/1996, Photocopy of Application made to Kaduthuruthy K.S.E.B, Photocopy of complaint submitted by one defendant before Assistant Engineer K.S.E.B
Defendants Documents
Photograph 12 numbers, Compact Disc

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P.R.Pramod
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anish Gopal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction to remove the obstruction on item No.3 pathway.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is not entitled to a decree of mandatory injunction. He had failed to prove a prima facie case.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants.
Evidence:
I am not inclined to grant a permanent prohibitory injunction as sought for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supports the plaintiff's claim of ownership and possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates the division of ancestral property related to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Electricity Connection Application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the plaintiff's attempt to obtain an electricity connection and the obstruction faced.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Photograph
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence related to the second defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Compact Disc
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence related to the second defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provides findings related to the path claimed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Accompanies the Commission Report and illustrates the properties involved.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Survey Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Details findings regarding the pathways and constructions in relation to the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Survey Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property layout that influences the court's decision.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Vaikom
Common Reasons
Obstruction of right of way
Case Code
Case between Shaji vs Thankappan, Chellamma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Shaji vs Thankappan, Chellamma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Vaikom Taluk, Kerala
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Vaikom
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 10/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Radha vs Rajappan regarding declaration, permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Remani et al vs Manoharan regarding declaration of easement by grant and for permanent prohibitory injunction
Court of the Munsiff, Vaikom
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Chellappan vs Santha regarding easement by declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Aswathy Jacob vs Nisha Philip et al regarding partition and injunction.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Thankappan vs Jineesh.P.U regarding fixation of boundary.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won