Case Summary
The plaintiff, Shanmughan, filed a suit for a permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction against the defendants Prakasan and his family regarding property disputes. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants are trespassing and causing damage to his properties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants directed to remove the wooden bridge in the plaint schedule properties within 30 days; plaintiffs entitled to remove it at defendants' expense if not removed.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting mandatory injunction against the defendants to remove a wooden bridge and prohibiting them from trespassing on the plaintiff's properties.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Supporting Evidence
From the unchallenged evidence, it can be seen that plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: a. Plaintiffs are entitled for an order of mandatory injunction whereby the defendants are directed to remove the item No.4 wooden bridge in the plaint schedule properties within 30 days from today.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Shanmughan
- Party Age
- 71
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prakasan
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prasanna
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Surjith
- Party Age
- 24
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No.2503/1988, Tax receipt dated 03.05.2023.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- S.N.Jayachandran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are directed to remove the wooden bridge in the plaint schedule properties within 30 days.
Evidence:
Plaintiffs are entitled for an order of mandatory injunction whereby the defendants are directed to remove the item No.4 wooden bridge in the plaint schedule properties within 30 days from today.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from trespassing, traveling along item No.1 to 3 properties, erecting any bridge, altering boundaries or removing sand from it.
Evidence:
The defendants or anybody under them are restrained by an order of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into item No.1 to 3 properties, travel along it, erect any bridge in it, alter its boundaries causing any damage and remove any sand from it.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are entitled to get costs from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to get cost from the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.2503/1988 shows that the plaint schedule item No.1 to 3 properties were purchased by the plaintiff and are being enjoyed by him in absolute possession.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt dated 03.05.2023 was filed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commissioner identified the properties in the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch related to the commission report filed.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Vaikom
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Shanmughan vs Prakasan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Shanmughan vs Prakasan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction.