Case Summary
The first plaintiff, T P Goplalan, claims ownership of a property and seeks to declare his right to a pathway obstructed by the defendant, Arun Prabhakaran. The case also involves a counter claim by the defendant regarding property rights and removal of trees.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is restrained from causing obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.3 way and directed to remove the obstruction.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the plaintiffs' suit, restraining the defendant from obstructing the plaintiffs' use of the pathway and ordered the defendant to remove the obstruction. The counter claim was partially allowed, directing the counter claim defendant to cut and remove tree roots.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiffs proved their right of easement by grant over the pathway.
Plaintiffs proved their right of easement by grant over the pathway.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiffs proved their right of easement by grant over the pathway.
Plaintiffs proved their right of easement by grant over the pathway.
Supporting Evidence
The court noted that the plaintiffs' right of easement was proven and that there was evidence showing that the pathway was indeed obstructed.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. The defendant is restrained from causing obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.3 way. 2. The defendant is directed to remove the obstruction in the plaint schedule item no:3 way so that the 2nd plaintiff could enter the plaint schedule item no:1 property through the said way.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- T P Goplalan
- Party Age
- 82
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Pradeep G
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Arun Prabhakaran
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale Deed No. 114/1987, Tax Receipt dated 09.11.2020.
Defendants Documents
Copy of Sale Deed no. 1143/2005, Copy of Partition Deed no. 2041/1972.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sajan A Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Blessen G Mathews
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P A Rabeez
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Shamil Basheer
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Reni Baby
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Surya M S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendant is restrained from causing obstruction to the user of the plaint schedule item no.3 way.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to the reliefs claimed for.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendant is directed to remove the obstruction in the plaint schedule item no.3 way.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed to remove the obstruction in the plaint schedule item no:3 way so that the 2nd plaintiff could enter the plaint schedule item no:1 property through the said way.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The counterclaim second defendant is directed to cut and remove the roots of the trees standing near the boundary of the counterclaim schedule item no.2 property.
Evidence:
The counterclaim 2nd defendant is directed to cut and remove the roots of the trees standing near the boundary of the counterclaim schedule item no:2 property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The first plaintiff obtained right and title over plaint schedule Item No.1 property by virtue of Sale Deed No. 114/1987.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The property description in Exhibit A2 matches with Exhibit A1.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows that the first plaintiff was paying tax for properties comprised in 509/23 and 509/27.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Location Map
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Prepared by the Village Officer to illustrate the property location.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Compromise agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the agreement entered between the 2nd plaintiff and the defendant before police officials.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Photo
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence presented by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Sale Deed No. 1143/2005 relevant to the counter claim.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Partition Deed No. 2041/1972 providing context to the counter claim.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner after inspecting the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch created by the Advocate Commissioner during the property visit.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Witness testimonies from PW1, PW2, DW1, and DW2 were presented in court.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between T P Goplalan et al vs Arun Prabhakaran regarding mandatory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between T P Goplalan et al vs Arun Prabhakaran regarding mandatory injunction.