Case Summary
Smt. Susheela Balagopal filed a suit against her daughter Lakshmi Mahesh and son-in-law Mahesh L.S for a permanent prohibitory injunction concerning joint property. The dispute arose due to alleged threats and harassment by the defendants regarding their claim on the property inherited from the plaintiff's late husband.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for a permanent prohibitory injunction based on a lack of evidence supporting her claims of obstruction and harassment by the defendants.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the granting of a permanent injunction.
The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the granting of a permanent injunction.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the granting of a permanent injunction.
The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the granting of a permanent injunction.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence do not disclose any clear or reliable proof of unlawful obstruction, trespass or interference by the defendants with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession or enjoyment of the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result: The suit is dismissed. Considering the relationship between the parties, there shall be no order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Smt. Susheela Balagopal
- Party Age
- 63
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Lakshmi Mahesh
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mahesh L.S
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- H/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Partition deed No.649/1996
Defendants Documents
Certified Copy of the judgment in OS 1273/2020, Certified Copy of the decree in OS 1273/2020, True copies of the documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. A. G. Gireesh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Meera Mohan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Veena S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Aravind A.R
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Abhiraj A.R
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Parvathy S. Pillai
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. K.S. Satheesh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
The plaintiff sought a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants.
Evidence:
This Court finds that the plaintiff has failed to establish the essential requirements for the grant of a permanent injunction.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Partition Deed No. 649/1996 dated 19.02.1996 marked to establish the ownership and inheritance of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of the judgment in OS 1273/2020 to show the existence of a pending partition suit.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Decree
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of the decree in OS 1273/2020 relevant to the current dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Other Documents
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copies of documents related to the property and ownership issues.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked to demonstrate the physical state and occupancy of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch prepared based on the commission report to illustrate the property layout.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Assessment Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Attested copy of the assessment register produced to discuss the property tax status.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Oral evidence
Relevance:
Witness testimonies were provided regarding the ownership and claims related to the property.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2020