Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Sheeba, Shamim, Baiju, and Gayathri, are seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant, Sarojini, to prevent her from encroaching on their property. The property in question has been possessed by the plaintiffs' family for many years, and they apprehend irreparable harm due to the defendant's actions.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from encroaching upon the plaint schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court established that the plaintiffs were in possession and had rightful ownership of the property, demonstrating imminent risk of encroachment by the defendant.
The court established that the plaintiffs were in possession and had rightful ownership of the property, demonstrating imminent risk of encroachment by the defendant.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court established that the plaintiffs were in possession and had rightful ownership of the property, demonstrating imminent risk of encroachment by the defendant.
The court established that the plaintiffs were in possession and had rightful ownership of the property, demonstrating imminent risk of encroachment by the defendant.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs produced Ext.A2-tax receipt which would go to show that tax is remitted in the name of the plaintifs' father. Moreover, the plaintiffs have established that they apprehend an encroachment into the said property by the defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and the defendant is restrained from encroaching into plaint schedule property and further restrained from committing any act of waste therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sheeba
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Shamim
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Baiju
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Gayathri
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sarojini
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Partition deed No. 2874/1967, Tax receipt No. 1900050, Tax receipt No. 0646418, Additional Tahsildar Proceedings No. K4-15205/14/Kdis.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Partition deed No. 4861/1101(M.E), Ration Card No. 1104052834, Certified copy of plaint in OS 366/1996, Certified copy of Judgment in OS. 366/1996 & OS. 369/1996.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Sureshkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Ambu
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M. Chandran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and the defendant is restrained from encroaching into plaint schedule property and further restrained from committing any act of waste therein.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
No order as to costs.
Evidence:
2. No order as to costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Used to establish the ownership rights of the plaintiffs over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to show that tax was remitted in the name of the plaintiffs' father.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further evidence of tax payments related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Proceedings
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Related to the administrative acknowledgement of the plaintiffs' claims.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof, used to show the condition of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Bill
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Related to expenses incurred possibly concerning the property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Compact Disc
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof, contents are likely relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Claimed by the defendant to establish their rights over a portion of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Ration Card
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Used as part of the defence to establish the defendant's presence and entitlement.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Plaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
For establishing prior legal claims to the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Used to bolster the defendant's claims regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Written Statement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Used to outline the defendant's position regarding the plaintiffs' claims.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Plaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Related to other suits that have implications on current claims.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Relevant to the background of property disputes involving the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Plaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Addresses a related property dispute previously adjudicated.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Used to provide a factual basis for the court's determination regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the physical layout of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Another report that relates to prior legal proceedings concerning the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provides further contextual information relevant to the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Represents a survey of the property to inform on its layout.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further documentation of prior assessments related to the defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type:
Testimony
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Testimonial evidence potentially tied to property claims.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type:
Basic Tax Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Background evidence of tax records supporting ownership.
Reference:
Ext.X1(a)
Document Type:
Thandapper Account
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Financial record concerning the property.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sheeba et al vs Sarojini regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sheeba et al vs Sarojini regarding permanent prohibitory injunction