Case Summary
The petitioner, Vijayamma, seeks a temporary injunction against the respondent, Saith, to stop him from excavating soil that is affecting her property’s lateral support. The petitioner claims to have enjoyed the lateral support for over 50 years, while the respondent denies this and asserts the legitimacy of his construction activities.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary injunction against excavation
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for temporary injunction is allowed. The respondent is restrained from excavating soil within 5 meters from the boundary that affects the lateral support of the petitioner’s property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established a prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favored her.
The petitioner established a prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favored her.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioner established a prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favored her.
The petitioner established a prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favored her.
Supporting Evidence
Hence, the petition stands allowed. The balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is allowed as follows: The respondent or his men are restrained from excavating soil to a distance of 5 meters from the boundary of plaint A schedule property in the plaint B schedule property by losing the lateral support to plaint A schedule property, by way of temporary injunction.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vijayamma
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saith
- Party Age
- 50
Plaintiffs Documents
Settlement deed bearing No. 3018/89, document bearing No. 2341/1970
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- A R Bijoy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Martin Davis
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Athira Thampi
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ashna Augustin
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Charls Devassy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Aysha Nazal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- S Rashmi
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M M Aliyar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Temporary injunction restraining the respondent from excavating soil to a distance of 5 meters from the boundary of plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
In view of the above discussions, I find that, the petitioner is entitled for the relief of temporary injunction as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The property was assigned in favor of the petitioner by virtue of this document.
Reference:
No. 3018/89
Document Type:
Title deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The property originally belonged to the father of the petitioner as per this document.
Reference:
No. 2341/1970
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The commission report noted the excavation of soil and destruction of boundaries.
Reference:
null
Document Type:
Affidavit
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The statements in the affidavit supported the petitioner's case.
Reference:
null
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.
Case Code Year
2024