Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S.No.1129/2022

Case between V.K. John vs Revathy.E.K. regarding injunction and realization of money

Court
II Additional Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Maneesha K Bhadran
Order Date
2024-01-12
Duration
approximately-1 year 1 month
Case Code No.
1129
Case Closed
Fri, 01/12/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, V.K. John, claims ownership of property and seeks a permanent injunction against the defendant, Revathy.E.K., for wrongful occupation and unpaid fees. The defendant contends that the arrangement was a lease, not a license.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, granting a mandatory injunction for the defendant to surrender the property and awarding monetary compensation for unpaid fees.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is directed to surrender plaint B schedule property to plaintiff within one month and pay Rs.31,384.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, granting a mandatory injunction for the defendant to surrender the property and awarding monetary compensation for unpaid fees.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the arrangement was a license, not a lease, and the plaintiff proved ownership and entitlement to relief.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the arrangement was a license, not a lease, and the plaintiff proved ownership and entitlement to relief.
Supporting Evidence
The unchallenged oral and documentary evidence is sufficient to grant a decree in favour of plaintiff. Considering the nature of the suit, I am of the view that defendant is liable to pay the costs of the proceedings to plaintiff.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed. Defendant is directed by a mandatory injunction to surrender plaint B schedule property to plaintiff within one month, failing which plaintiff can seek the assistance of the court and execute the same at the expense of defendant.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
V.K. John
Party Age
71
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Revathy.E.K.
Party Age
31
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 497/95 of SRO, Ernakulam, Original Agreement of License between Plaintiff and Defendant, Office copy of lawyer notice issued to the defendant.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Vimal.K.Charles
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.C. Charles
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Renju.A.T.
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
C. Devanad
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Aparna.P. Menon
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anjalli.G. Krishnan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
S.Ravikumar
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Akhil George
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Soumyalakshmi.S.
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Arjun.S. Menon
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Directed defendant to surrender plaint B schedule property to plaintiff within one month.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed... Defendant is directed by a mandatory injunction to surrender plaint B schedule property to plaintiff within one month.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize Rs.31,384 from defendant.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is entitled to realize Rs.31,384 (Rupees Thirty one thousand three hundred and eighty four only) from defendant.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendant is directed to pay costs of the suit to plaintiff.
Evidence:
Defendant is directed to pay costs of the suit to plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 497/95 of SRO, Ernakulam, establishing plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: License Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Agreement of License between Plaintiff and Defendant, outlining the terms of property use.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Cheque
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original cheque No. 570573 of SBI, Kakkodi Branch for Rs. 15,000, relevant to the security deposit.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Office copy of lawyer notice issued to the defendant on 13.09.2022, revoking the license.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Acknowledgement Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original acknowledgement card related to communication with the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Office copy of lawyer notice issued to the defendant on 12.10.2022, further revoking the license.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Acknowledgement Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original acknowledgement card related to communication with the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2022

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Tue, 12/06/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 01/12/2024 - 12:00
From
Mon, 01/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Wed, 01/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Rahath Hakkeem vs Rajani Sreekumar regarding mandatory injunction
II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Ajay Kumar Gupta et al vs Shajan Joseph.K.R. et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
II Additional Munsiff Court
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Smt. Baby Ravi vs Sajini Nandakumar regarding realization of money
II Additional Munsiff Court
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Metadata Technologies vs M/s. Smart City (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. regarding suit not pressed.
II Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between V P Rajamma vs Devassy alias Thomas regarding restoration of suit
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won