Case Summary
Sumangala Devi and others are plaintiffs seeking a perpetual prohibitory injunction against Madhavan Nair and others. The plaintiffs claim that the defendants are attempting to trespass and interfere with their possession of properties.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed with costs for the defendants as the court found that the plaintiffs did not have title or possession over the plaint A and B schedule properties.
Key Reasoning:
The court concluded that the plaintiffs were not able to establish their claims over the property.
The court concluded that the plaintiffs were not able to establish their claims over the property.
Why Defendant Won:
The court concluded that the plaintiffs were not able to establish their claims over the property.
The court concluded that the plaintiffs were not able to establish their claims over the property.
Supporting Evidence
Thus it can only be concluded that plaintiffs properly lies in resurvey 110/2 and not in resurvey 114/1.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs of defendant Nos’1 to 11.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sumangala Devi
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sahadevan
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Unni
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Dananjayan
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Priyaranjan
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Madhavan Nair
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prabhavathy
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Radhamma
- Party Age
- 32
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Indira
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Radhakrishnan
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of partition deed 574/1956, Certified copy of Gift deed No. 514/80, Land tax receipts
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.V.Sunil Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P.A. Sajeed
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sunitha
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. K.P. Mayan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Requested to restrain the defendants from trespassing and interfering with the plaintiff's possession.
Evidence:
In view of the findings in issue No.1,2,3 and additional issues 1 and 5 to 8 it is found that suit is only to be dismissed.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Claimed that documents No.2912/2007 and 4067/2009 are null and void.
Evidence:
In view of the findings in issue No.1,2,3 and additional issues 1 and 5 to 8 it is found that suit is only to be dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certifies the ownership of the properties claimed by the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Gift Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the transfer of ownership of the property to the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides evidence of the plaintiffs' possession and payment of taxes for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3 to A12
Document Type:
Purchase Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Conclusive proof of the plaintiffs' title over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Contains findings regarding the boundaries and ownership of the disputed properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Presents an earlier assessment made by the court on the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Documents additional findings related to the disputed properties.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sumangala Devi et al vs Madhavan Nair et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sumangala Devi et al vs Madhavan Nair et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction