Case Summary
The plaintiff, Sujith Thachanandiyil, claims ownership and peaceful possession of a property and seeks an injunction against the defendants, Rajeesh. E. K, Narayani, and Subija, who allegedly trespassed and attempted to dismantle property barriers. The defendants assert they have a right of way through the plaintiff's property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiff established ownership and possession over the property with supporting evidence from commission reports.
Plaintiff established ownership and possession over the property with supporting evidence from commission reports.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiff established ownership and possession over the property with supporting evidence from commission reports.
Plaintiff established ownership and possession over the property with supporting evidence from commission reports.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has constructed the compound wall not encroaching upon anyone’s property but it is within the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs. The defendants, their men or agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and from constructing way of any sought through any part of the plaint schedule property.
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 of SRO, Edachery, Basic Tax Receipt issued by Village Office, Thuneri to Sujith, Building Permit No. 118/2009-2010 along with plan issued by Secretary, Thuneri, Gramapanchayath to the plaintiff.
Defendants Documents
Photograph, Reply letter from Secretary, Thuneri Gramapanchayath to Rajeesh, Letter from Secretary, Thuneri Gramapanchayath to Rajeesh, Letter from Village Office, Thuneri to RDO, Vatakara.
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:
Restraining defendants from trespassing and constructing a way through the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants, their men or agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and from constructing way of any sought through any part of the plaint schedule property.
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:
Establishes the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim of property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Legal permission for construction on plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supports the plaintiff's claim of title over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Visual evidence possibly related to the defendant's claims or actions.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Reply letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Communication from the Gramapanchayath related to the case.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Further communication from the Gramapanchayath relevant to the property dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Correspondence to the RDO concerning the property matter.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document filed by defendant alleging claims against plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Complaint from another individual related to the dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Receipt indicating correspondence related to the case.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document submitted by defendant addressing the issue to the RDO.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provides findings from the Advocate Commissioner's visit to the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property as assessed by the Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further findings from the Advocate Commissioner's follow-up assessment.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Surveyor plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Survey details related to the property case.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Final assessment report from the Advocate Commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Final visual representation of findings related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
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