Case Summary
This case involves a counterclaim filed by the defendants against the original plaintiffs concerning a water channel. The defendants assert that the plaintiffs have obstructed their property, impacting the flow of water.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Counterclaim plaintiffs have the right of easement; defendants ordered to remove obstructions.
Case Type
Counterclaim
Final Judgment
No
The counterclaim was allowed, declaring that the counterclaim plaintiffs have acquired a right of easement. The defendants were ordered to remove obstruction from the water channel.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The existence of a water channel and uninterrupted usage for drainage was established.
The existence of a water channel and uninterrupted usage for drainage was established.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The existence of a water channel and uninterrupted usage for drainage was established.
The existence of a water channel and uninterrupted usage for drainage was established.
Supporting Evidence
The report further shows the presence of a small outlet facilitating the flow of water... Considering the uninterrupted use of the passage for the flow of water over several decades...
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the counterclaim is allowed...the counterclaim defendants are restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing...
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- St. Sebastian Kurishu Pally, Idavoor
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Fr. Paul Manayambilly
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jojo, S/o. Yohannan
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Boban, S/o. Pathrose
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K O Paulachan, S/o. Ouseph
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Suja John
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- D/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sona John
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- D/o.
Plaintiffs Documents
A1-03/11/82-Sale deal No.1769/1982 from SRO Perumbavoor, A2-15-05-2020-Copy of Land Tax Receipt Koovappady Village Office
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P T Geevarghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Praju K Paul
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rohan Roy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M H Khadeeja
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Simi C.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Recognition of an easement right for unobstructed water flow through the thodu.
Evidence:
It is hereby declared that the counterclaim plaintiffs have acquired a right of easement by prescription for the unobstructed flow of water through the counterclaim second schedule property.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Order to remove obstructions in the thodu.
Evidence:
The counterclaim defendants are directed by way of mandatory injunction to remove the earth and obstructions deposited by them in the said thodu.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from interfering with the flow of water.
Evidence:
The counterclaim defendants are restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing, altering, or interfering with the natural course and flow of water through the counterclaim schedule no. 2 property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document evidencing the ownership of the first schedule property obtained to extend the chapel premises.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document relating to the tax details of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Photos
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photographic evidence related to the properties discussed in the case.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report detailing the existence of the channel (thodu) between the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch submitted for clarity on the locations and properties involved.
Reference:
Ext.C1a
Case Classification
Case Type
Counterclaim
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Obstruction of water flow
Case Code
Case between St. Sebastian Kurishu Pally, Idavoor et al vs Suja John et al regarding water channel obstruction and easement rights
Case Code Year
Case between St. Sebastian Kurishu Pally, Idavoor et al vs Suja John et al regarding water channel obstruction and easement rights