Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
OS.226/2019

Case between Thomas et al vs K T Pathrose regarding injunction

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Sumey Chandran
Order Date
2025-11-29
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, who are brothers, are seeking an injunction against their uncle, the defendant, regarding access to a well on the defendant's property. The plaintiffs claim an easementary right to draw water from the well, which they assert was granted in a partition deed.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiffs failed to establish the existence of the well from which they claimed the right to draw water. No evidence provided was deemed sufficient to support their claim.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to prove the present existence of the well and their claim of easementary right.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed. No costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Thomas (57 years years) Kalamparanbil House, Iringole Kara, Perumbavoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk Gracy Sunny (55 years years) Kalayil House, Kuruppampady Kara Jose (53 years years) Kalamparanbil House, Iringole Kara, Perumbavoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk James (51 years years) Kalamparanbil House, Iringole Kara, Perumbavoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk Mercy Sojan (49 years years) Illathukudy House, Oonnukal Kara, Kavalangadu Village, Kothamangalam Taluk

Defendants

K T Pathrose (68 years years) Kalamparambil House, Iringole Kara, Perumbavoor Village, Kunnathunadu Taluk

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiffs sought a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from obstructing their alleged right to draw water from a well.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs have therefore failed to establish the very foundation of their claim.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the partition deed under which the plaintiffs claim their right to draw water from the well situated on the defendant's property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the plaintiffs' claim related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the plaintiffs' claim related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Caveat Petition
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is relevant to the proceedings of the suit.
Reference:
Ext.A4

Quick Facts

Location
Perumbavoor
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases