Case Summary
The plaintiffs are seeking a mandatory injunction against the defendants, who are the office bearers of neighboring properties. The plaintiffs claim ownership of the properties and allege that the defendants are attempting to interfere with their possession.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit OS 294/2006 is dismissed. The defendants are entitled to the costs of the suit from the plaintiffs, while OS 306/2006 is partly decreed, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs failed to establish possession of the plaint schedule properties.
The plaintiffs failed to establish possession of the plaint schedule properties.
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
The OS 294/2006 stands dismissed. In the result, the OS 306/2006 is partly decreed as follows: I. A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs restraining the defendants and their men and agents from trespassing into the plaint schedule property in OS 306/2006.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sumitha Rahim
- Party Age
- 28
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sabitha Rahim
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sajitha Jaleel
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sainu Rahim
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mohammed Jaleel
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Ramachandran
- Party Age
- 48
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Ratheeshkumar
- Party Age
- 30
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Hariharam
- Party Age
- 58
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Murali
- Party Age
- 50
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sree Raja Rjeswari Temple represented by K Hariharan Nair
- Party Age
- 51
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney, Sale Deeds, Tax Receipts
Defendants Documents
Agreement, Counter Affidavit
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- N.C Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.P Rexy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P Suresh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R Rajesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sibi Karun
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs requested mandatory injunction to remove the defendants' constructions.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs have not succeeded in establishing the possession over the Plaint B to F Schedule properties.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction restraining defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs herein had constructed a wall in the plaint schedule properties thereby blocking the access of the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Primary document establishing authority for plaintiffs Sanuja Naushad, Sainu Rahim and M.A Abdul Rahim.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of ownership for plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Property tax receipt supporting claim of possession.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of ownership for plaint C schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of ownership for plaint D schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of ownership for plaint E schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of ownership for plaint F schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type:
Patta
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of claim regarding ownership and rights to the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A16
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report on property status and possession.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Additional report on property status.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Further documentation regarding the status of the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Unauthorised occupation
Case Code
Case between Sumitha Rahim et al vs Ramachandran et al regarding mandatory injunction and consequential reliefs
Case Code Year
Case between Sumitha Rahim et al vs Ramachandran et al regarding mandatory injunction and consequential reliefs