Case Summary
The plaintiff Sugathan claims ownership of property and seeks a permanent injunction against the defendants for trespassing and damaging his property. The defendants, including Shyama and others, have allegedly attempted to widen a pathway and have caused damage to the plaintiff's property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants and their men are restrained from demolishing property and widening the pathway.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court has ruled in favor of the plaintiff, decreeing that the defendants must refrain from damaging the plaintiff's property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff succeeded in proving his case with substantial evidence.
The plaintiff succeeded in proving his case with substantial evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff succeeded in proving his case with substantial evidence.
The plaintiff succeeded in proving his case with substantial evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has succeeded in proving his case. Moreover, there is no evidence to rebut the evidence adduced on the side of the plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, this suit is decreed in part as follows: (I) The defendants and their men are hereby restrained from demolishing eastern and southern boundary wall of the plaint A schedule property and from widening the pathway by encroaching the plaint A schedule property and from committing any damage of mischief therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sugathan
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o.Sreedharan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shyama
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- D/o.Maniyamma
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Maniyamma
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- D/o.Gopalan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Antony peter
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o. Peter
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ajith
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o.Venu
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sharath
- Party Age
- 30
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale deed No. 3105/1994, Land tax receipt, Complaint receipt, Copy of complaint, Application under RTI Act
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sheeja Kannan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Nil
- Appearance Type
- Case between Sugathan vs Shyama et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction > Case advocates
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from damaging the boundary wall and widening the pathway.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are hereby restrained from demolishing eastern and southern boundary wall of the plaint A schedule property and from widening the pathway by encroaching the plaint A schedule property and from committing any damage of mischief therein.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realise costs of the suit from the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the tax payment for the property in the plaintiff's name.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Complaint receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Documents the complaint lodged by the plaintiff regarding the defendants' actions.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Copy of complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the specific complaint made by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Copy of complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further complaint made by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Copy of complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another complaint lodged by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Complaint receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receives acknowledgement of the complaint by the police.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Copy of Application under RTI Act
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Documents the application filed by the plaintiff under RTI.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Reply under RTI Act
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides the information requested under RTI.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Contains the findings of the advocate commissioner on the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1 series
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Trespass
Case Code
Case between Sugathan vs Shyama et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sugathan vs Shyama et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction