Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Vipin and others, claim ownership of a pathway for access to their properties against the defendants, Baby C.M and others, who are allegedly infringing on this right. The court determined that the plaintiffs have exclusive rights to the pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from using the plaint schedule pathway.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, confirming their exclusive rights to the pathway and permanently restraining the defendants from using it.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the pathway purchased for their exclusive use.
The court found that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the pathway purchased for their exclusive use.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the pathway purchased for their exclusive use.
The court found that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the pathway purchased for their exclusive use.
Supporting Evidence
The unchallenged proof affidavit and documents would satisfactorily prove the plaint claim. So, a decree can rightly be passed as prayed for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed by a declaration that the defendants, their men and agents are not entitled to use plaint schedule pathway for ingress and egress to plaint A schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vipin
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sathyapalan
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Joy
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ammini Joy
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajesh P.D
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Baby C.M
- Party Age
- 63
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Elson
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed no 279/09, Certified copy of Sale deed no 642/09, Certified copy of Sale deed no 2526/16, Certified copy of Sale deed no 679/14, Original Power of Attorney.
Defendants Documents
Nill
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manoj B Menon
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rashmi K.M
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Shahul Hameed Moopan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arun T.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- T.A.Niyas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Abhijith Harindran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.J.Kuriachan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sunil Jacob
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Declaration that the defendants, their men and agents are not entitled to use plaint schedule pathway for ingress and egress to plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed by a declaration that the defendants, their men and agents are not entitled to use plaint schedule pathway for ingress and egress to plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from using plaint schedule pathway for ingress and egress to plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed by a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants, their men and agents from using plaint schedule pathway for ingress and egress to plaint A schedule property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
These sale deeds establish the plaintiffs' ownership and rights over the properties and the plaint schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A1, Ext.A2, Ext.A3, Ext.A4, Ext.A5, Ext.A6, Ext.A7
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This document contains findings related to the commission appointed by the court, which support the plaintiffs' claims.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The rough sketch illustrates the layout of the plaint schedule pathway relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Vipin et al vs Baby C.M et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Vipin et al vs Baby C.M et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction