Case Summary
The plaintiff, Sujith Thachanandiyil, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Rajeesh. E. K, Narayani, and Subija, who he alleges have trespassed onto his property. The defendants claim an easement by necessity over the disputed way.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted the plaintiff's request for a permanent prohibitory injunction, thus restraining the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule property and interfering with the plaintiff's possession.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established ownership and possession of the property, demonstrating that the defendants had no right to trespass.
The plaintiff established ownership and possession of the property, demonstrating that the defendants had no right to trespass.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established ownership and possession of the property, demonstrating that the defendants had no right to trespass.
The plaintiff established ownership and possession of the property, demonstrating that the defendants had no right to trespass.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has succeeded in getting a relief of permanent prohibitory injunction from this court and the defendants has failed to establish an easementary right or the disputed way.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sujith Thachanandiyil
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rajeesh. E. K
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Narayani
- Party Age
- 85
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Subija
- Party Age
- 32
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Assignment Deed No. 906/2009, Basic Tax Receipt issued by Village Office, Building Permit No. 118/2009-2010.
Defendants Documents
Photographs, Letters from Secretary, Thuneri Gramapanchayath.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. K. K. Anil Raj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Krishna Kumar. K
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Hareesh. E. Karayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought to restrain defendants from trespassing and constructing a way through the property.
Evidence:
The plaintiff has succeeded in getting a relief of permanent prohibitory injunction from this court.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to get the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to get the costs of the suit.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Documents permission for the plaintiff's construction on the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further substantiates the plaintiff's title to the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Visual evidence presented by defendants regarding the disputed area.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Reply letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Correspondence related to defendants' claims and objections.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Further correspondence that supports the defendants' position.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document indicating complaints related to the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Photocopy of Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence of a complaint filed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Photocopy of Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Further evidence of complaints filed regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Receives acknowledgment of communication submitted by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Photocopy of Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Additional evidence of complaints made regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court's assessment of the property and related observations.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property as evaluated by the commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further court assessment regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Surveyor plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Detailed plan provided by the surveyor concerning the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Final report filed by the advocate commissioner related to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan illustrating the findings of the advocate commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sujith Thachanandiyil vs Rajeesh. E. K et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sujith Thachanandiyil vs Rajeesh. E. K et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction