Case Summary
The plaintiff, VAZHAYIL KUMARAN, seeks a declaration of his right to vehicular access through the property of the defendants, CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AJMAL and CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AZEEZ. The plaintiff claims he has an easement right due to an oral agreement with a former owner.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for declaration and injunction. It found that the plaintiff did not establish his claim to the easement sought.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of an easement by grant or any right to the pathway as claimed.
The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of an easement by grant or any right to the pathway as claimed.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The primary burden is always upon the plaintiff to establish the right of easement by grant which he has failed to establish.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- VAZHAYIL KUMARAN
- Party Age
- 79
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AJMAL
- Party Age
- 32
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AZEEZ
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certificate of Registration of vehicle bearing number KL-18F-3331, Basic Tax receipt issued by Village Office, Nadapuram, Photocopy of medical prescription of Aster Mims Hospital, Relevant page of diary.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Assignment Deed No. 1680/2022 of SRO, Nadapuram, Certified copy of Assignment Deed No. 1755/2022 of SRO, Nadapuram.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. K. K. Krishna Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Akhilesh. P. T
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Vandana Venugopalan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C. Subramanyian
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P. Anoop
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P. M. Previn
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Abdul Raoof. V. P
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff's request for a declaration of right of user upon the C schedule property.
Evidence:
Therefore, the easement right over plaint C schedule pathway is not established.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Request for a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiff cannot seek a relief of permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction from this court.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction to ensure continued access via the C schedule property.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiff cannot seek a relief of permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction from this court.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certificate of Registration
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves that the plaintiff owns a Toyota Innova car.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes ownership and tax payment for the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Medical prescription
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates plaintiff's health condition necessitating vehicular access.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Diary Entry
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Records the payments made for the easement right to Mr. Haneefa Thangal.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the condition and existence of the C schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Affidavit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Affirms the easement right claimed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Affidavit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as testimony regarding the use of the C schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms plaintiff's ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Documents defendant's ownership of plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Further confirms details of property transaction for the plaint B schedule.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Reports on the existence of the C schedule property and its dimensions.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the C schedule property as per the commissioner's findings.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Includes additional photographs relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provides further evidence about the obstruction on the C schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the layout and condition of the C schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between VAZHAYIL KUMARAN vs CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AJMAL et al regarding declaration and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between VAZHAYIL KUMARAN vs CHERUPEEDIKAYIL AJMAL et al regarding declaration and injunction