Similar Cases
Based on: Original Suit No. 354/2021 — Case between Mini vs Puzhakkara Nabeesa et al regarding Mandatory and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction
48 matching cases found, ranked by shared legal context
Original Suit No.462/2021
Case between Kadeeja vs Kunnamagalam Grama Panchayath regarding mandatory injunction
Kadeeja is the plaintiff claiming ownership over a property that the Kunnamagalam Grama Panchayath has converted into a public road. The plaintiff seeks an injunction to remove the construction on her property.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT 19/2018
Case between JASHILNADH. R vs VADAKKAYIL PATHU et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and declaration
Jashilnadh. R is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against VADAKKAYIL PATHU and others, who are accused of attempting to unlawfully construct a retaining wall affecting the plaintiff's property rights. The case centers on the right of way to the plaint A schedule property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 509/2018
Case between Indira vs Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath regarding suit dismissal for default
Indira, the plaintiff, was involved in a suit against Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath, the defendant. The case was dismissed for default as the plaintiff was absent during the hearing.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 510/2018
Case between Kelan vs Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath regarding dismissal for default.
Kelan, the plaintiff, is involved in a suit against Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath, the defendant. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to the dismissal of the case for default.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 511/2018
Case between Indira vs Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath regarding dismissal for default
Indira filed a lawsuit against Koodaranhi Grama Panchayath. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to the dismissal of the suit for default.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO 120/2024
Case between Kunhabdulla vs Vaniyam Veetil Muhammad Ali et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
This case involves Kunhabdulla, the plaintiff, who is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, including Vaniyam Veetil Muhammad Ali, to prevent them from trespassing onto his property for a road widening project. The defendants allegedly entered the property without consent and marked sections they claimed were necessary for the road work.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO 122/2024
Case between RAKHI @ RAGISHA vs VANIYAM VEETIL MUHAMMAD ALI et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
The plaintiffs, Rakhi @ Ragisha and Kamala, seek a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, including Vaniyam Veetil Muhammad Ali and others, who are alleged to have trespassed into their property to mark for road widening without consent. The plaintiffs contest the defendants' claims of rights over their property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO 124/2024
Case between SURESH vs VANIYAM VEETIL MUHAMMAD ALI et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction.
The case involves plaintiffs SURESH and RAHNA seeking a permanent injunction against defendants VANIYAM VEETIL MUHAMMAD ALI, AKHILA MARIYAT, C. K. NAZAR, K. T. K CHANDRAN, NADAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, and URALUNGAL LABOUR CONTRACT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. to restrain them from trespassing and committing acts of waste on the plaint schedule property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
O.S No.754/2019
Case between Thomas @ Baby et al vs Secretary regarding declaration and injunction.
The plaintiffs, Thomas @ Baby and Mathew, claim to be the absolute owners of properties and are contesting the defendant's action of measuring their private road without legal right. The suit seeks to declare the road as private property and prevent the defendant from taking further action.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
O.S No. 682/2017
Case between Jose K Joseph vs Ayarkunnam Grama Panchayath et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Jose K Joseph, the plaintiff, is the owner of a property who seeks to prevent the defendants from constructing a concrete ramp that would block his access. The defendants include the Panchayath and several neighbors who are asserting the right to construct the ramp.
Civil Suit
Partial
O.S 36/2019
Case between Aruna D. Pillai et al vs Pradeep Kumar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
The plaintiffs, Aruna D. Pillai and Damodaran Pillai, have filed a suit against defendants Pradeep Kumar, Narayanan Nair, and Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath regarding a disputed property where the defendants allegedly attempted to widen a pathway encroaching on the plaintiffs' property. The plaintiffs seek a decree to restrain the defendants from such actions.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
O.S 206/2024
Case between Philip vs Erumely Grama Panchayath regarding declaration and injunction.
Philip is the plaintiff claiming possessory rights over a property. The case involves an FIR registered against him by the defendant Panchayath regarding the removal of rubber trees from the property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
O.S 206/2024
Case between Philip vs Erumely Grama Panchayath regarding declaration and injunction.
The plaintiff, Philip, claims possessory rights over a property and seeks an injunction against the Erumely Grama Panchayath, which has allegedly interfered with his rights. The case involves previous ownership documents and claims of adverse possession.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 774/2015
Case between Padmini vs Yasodha P regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
This case involves plaintiffs Padmini and Nidheesh seeking a perpetual prohibitory injunction to prevent the defendants from evicting them from their property. The plaintiffs allege that they are the lawful occupants of the property and have faced threats of eviction from the defendants.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.175/2018
Case between Lakshmikutty Amma et al vs Kozhikode City Service Co-operative Bank et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction.
The plaintiffs, a husband and wife, are seeking a declaration regarding their life interest in a property previously settled to their son, the second defendant. They claim that a loan taken by the second defendant against the property was unauthorized as their consent was not obtained.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.317/2023
Case between P.A.Sajeed vs Muhammed Shihab regarding mandatory injunction and damages
The case involves P.A.Sajeed as the plaintiff and Muhammed Shihab as the defendant. The plaintiff is seeking a mandatory injunction for the defendant to vacate the premises and damages for unauthorized occupation.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No. 01/2017
Case between Ramanattukara Scheduled caste Service Co-operative Society vs Assistant Engineer, N.H. Bypass Division et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction and compensation
The plaintiff, Ramanattukara Scheduled Caste Service Co-operative Society, seeks a perpetual prohibitory injunction against the defendants, who are involved in the construction of a flyover. The suit aims to prevent the defendants from trespassing on the plaintiff's property and causing interference.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
Original Suit No. 182/2005
Case between Rajagopalan Nair et al vs Kamalam et al regarding injunction
The plaintiffs, Rajagopalan Nair (deceased) and five others, filed a suit for injunction against Kamalam and others, claiming that the defendants attempted to trespass upon their property. The case revolves around property ownership and boundary disputes.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.626/2023
Case between Padmavathi, V.K vs Sakunthala.V.K et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
The case involves Padmavathi, who is seeking a declaration that a certain property belongs to her and a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. The defendants are accused of trying to make forged claims on the property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 367/2024
Case between N. Rathnavally vs M.P. Binoos regarding mandatory injunction and realization of money.
The plaintiff, N. Rathnavally, is suing the defendant, M.P. Binoos, for a mandatory injunction and to recover overdue license fees. The defendant has occupied the plaint schedule shed without payment after the license agreement expired.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No.744/2023
Case between Anil. E. P vs Samastha Kerala Jam-Iyyathul Muallimeen Central Council regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Anil. E. P is the plaintiff, seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against Samastha Kerala Jam-Iyyathul Muallimeen Central Council, the defendant. The plaintiff claims to be in possession of a property he leased and accuses the defendant of attempting to evict him unlawfully.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit Nos. 353/2024
Case between Shibu vs R. Rajagopalakrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Shibu is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against R. Rajagopalakrishnan and others. The case arises from a dispute over property ownership and related claims.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.20/2023
Case between Niravu Farmers Producer Company Ltd vs The Chathamangalam Grama Panchayath regarding realization of an amount due
Niravu Farmers Producer Company Ltd is the plaintiff seeking to recover an amount due from The Chathamangalam Grama Panchayath, the defendant. The case involved a claim presented under the Code of Civil Procedure.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
EP/85/2025
Case between Purameri Panchayath vanitha Co operative Society Ltd vs Ratheesh P K et al regarding execution of decree
The petitioner is Purameri Panchayath vanitha Co operative Society Ltd, and the respondent includes Ratheesh P K and others. The case involves the execution of a decree for payment of a debt, with the respondent expressing willingness to repay.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
O.S 124/2018
Case between Varghese Chacko vs Secretary, Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Varghese Chacko is the plaintiff claiming title and possession over a property for more than 100 years. The defendants, including the Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath, are attempting to take possession of the property for constructing an Anganawadi.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.531/2015
Case between P.Premi et al vs M.Rijeesh et al regarding recovery of possession and consequential injunction.
The plaintiffs, P.Premi and Sunila, seek recovery of possession and a mandatory injunction against the defendants, M.Rijeesh and others, who have allegedly encroached upon their property. The court found that the defendants had constructed structures on the plaintiffs' land without permission.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.08/2022
Case between Bineesh vs Thekkedath Sreenivasan Nair et al regarding declaration of right and injunction.
The plaintiff, Bineesh, filed a suit against Thekkedath Sreenivasan Nair and others regarding access to a pathway serving his property. The defendants were absent during the hearing and raised claims over the pathway.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No.35/2021
Case between Malayil Balan vs Nikhil regarding injunction restraining trespass
Malayil Balan filed a suit to restrain Nikhil from trespassing onto the scheduled property belonging to Balan's son-in-law. Nikhil counterclaimed for a mandatory injunction to restore a pathway he claimed was unjustly blocked by Balan.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No. 229 / 2020
Case between Narmadha et al vs Marakkath Lal regarding permanent injunction
The plaintiffs, Narmadha and others, claim ownership and possession of a property originally held under a partition deed. They seek an injunction against the defendant, Marakkath Lal, who is the legal heir of the previous owner, to prevent trespassing into the property.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO : 585/2018
Case between V.M. Abdulkhader Muhammed vs Calicut North Service Co-Operative Bank regarding mandatory and prohibitory injunction.
V.M. Abdulkhader Muhammed is the plaintiff claiming ownership of a property and disputing a loan liability claimed by Calicut North Service Co-Operative Bank. The plaintiff asserts he never availed any loan from the bank, while the bank claims he is liable for loans taken by a friend using the property as collateral.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
Original Suit No. 91 / 2021
Case between Saifudheen Ibrahim et al vs K.S.Madhusoodanan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
The plaintiffs seek a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants to prevent them from creating any charge or alienating property allotted to the plaintiffs per a final decree. The case involves disputes arising from a partition suit.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No. 345/2016
Case between Thottathil Pachukutty et al vs Thottathil Sulochana et al regarding recovery of possession of immovable property and mandatory injunction.
The plaintiffs, Thottathil Pachukutty et al, claim ownership over a property from which the defendant, Thottathil Sulochana, allegedly encroached and constructed a house illegally. The case involves disputes over property boundaries and title.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.453/2022
Case between Hathikka KV vs Nisha regarding mandatory injunction and compensation.
Hathikka KV, the plaintiff, filed a suit against Nisha, the defendant, seeking a mandatory injunction to vacate the property used for unauthorized occupation and compensation for damages. The plaintiff claims the defendant has overstayed the agreement terms, and the property is needed for a medical shop.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 662/2017
Case between Girish .M vs Sreenivasan.M et al regarding partition of property
Girish .M is the plaintiff seeking partition of property against Sreenivasan.M and several others who are the defendants. The case revolves around the division of property originally owned by their deceased father, M. Raghavan.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 914/2019
Case between Sadasivan et al vs Valiyedath Subhadra et al regarding partition
The plaintiffs, Sadasivan and others, are seeking a partition of a property which they claim is co-owned with the defendants, Valiyedath Subhadra and others. The case revolves around the rights over a property originally belonging to their ancestor, Kunjipennu.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.875/2018
Case between K.Thankamani vs Valappil Nadeera regarding recovery of possession
K. Thankamani filed a suit against Valappil Nadeera for recovery of possession of property based on a title established by an earlier court judgment which declared a cancellation deed void. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant has no rights to the property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT NO. 55/2024
Case between Vanaja Shanmughan vs Neelakandan et al regarding partition
The plaintiff, Vanaja Shanmughan, is seeking a partition of property that was previously owned by her mother and siblings. The defendants, who are related to the plaintiff, did not appear in court and were declared exparte.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No. 132/2022
Case between Ahammed koya S.V. vs Bichu et al regarding declaration and recovery of possession.
The plaintiff, Ahammed koya S.V., seeks declaration and recovery of possession of property claimed to be his late mother's. The defendants, Bichu and others, contest this claim, asserting rights over the property based on a gift from the plaintiff's mother.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 779/2023
Case between Sreedharan et al vs Rajesh et al regarding partition of property.
The plaintiffs, led by Sreedharan, seek a partition of property originally owned by Unnikandan and subsequently inherited. The defendants, Rajesh, Kalyani, and Rajeev, have not participated in the proceedings.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 328/2015
Case between Ayisha vs Vellathumparambil,V.P.Balakrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction, mandatory injunction and recovery of possession.
Ayisha, the plaintiff, filed a suit against Vellathumparambil,V.P.Balakrishnan and others seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction and recovery of possession of property. The suit arose from disputes over alleged trespass and construction by the defendants on the plaintiff's property.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 572 /2012
Case between E.S. Santhadevi et al vs Sarada et al regarding recovery of possession and declaration of property rights
E.S. Santhadevi and E.S. Maheshkumar, the plaintiffs, are seeking recovery of possession of property from the defendants, who include Sarada and others. The case revolves around property rights and alleged trespass by the defendants.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
Original Suit No. 216/2019
Case between Latha.K.V vs Thankam.K.V et al regarding partition of property
The plaintiff, Latha.K.V, is seeking partition of a property after the death of her father, Balan, which she claims is jointly owned by herself and the defendants. The defendants, including Thankam.K.V, dispute the legitimacy of the plaintiff's claims and assert that there is no property available for partition due to prior settlements.
Civil Suit
Partial
Original Suit No. 261/1999
Case between T.N. Devaki vs Padmanabhan Nair et al regarding setting aside the partition deed
The plaintiff, T.N. Devaki, seeks to set aside the partition deed claiming fraud and undue influence exerted by the defendants, who are her relatives. The case revolves around the legitimacy of the shares allotted to her in a disputed property.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
Original Suit No. 377/2019
Case between M.K.Shailaja vs A.K. Vanaja et al regarding declaration and cancellation of document No. 3539/2012
The case involves M.K.Shailaja seeking a declaration that document No. 3539/2012 was executed by fraud and misrepresentation against her. The plaintiff seeks to cancel this document based on claims of lack of consent and consideration.
Civil Suit
Defendant Won
Original Suit Nos: 499/2017
Case between Erattil Chinna Mani vs Erattil Anil Kumar et al regarding partition of property
Erattil Chinna Mani filed a suit against Erattil Anil Kumar and others for partition of the property originally belonging to their father, Erattil Velayudhan. The case involves disputes regarding the division of the property among the heirs after Velayudhan's death.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No.242/2024
Case between Sivadasan et al vs Shibu Adukkkathu regarding partition
The plaintiffs are Sivadasan, Sathyan, Pradeepan, Radha, Geetha, and Sheeba, who are seeking a partition of the property originally owned by Peravakutty. The defendant is Shibu Adukkkathu, who is residing on a portion of the property and is entitled to a share.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
Original Suit No. 334/2021
Case between Mohanan. P.V et al vs Gireesh. P. V. et al regarding partition
The plaintiffs, Mohanan. P.V, Sudheer. P.V, and Dharmmarajan, are seeking a partition of property against the defendants, Gireesh. P. V. and Jayarajan. P. V., who are also family members. The case revolves around the division of inherited property and the presumption of death for missing heirs.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 70/2024
Case between Babu. P vs Vinod Kumar. P et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Babu. P filed a suit against Vinod Kumar. P and others for a permanent prohibitory injunction regarding temple rituals and construction activities. The plaintiff claims that the defendants are obstructing his rights as the managing trustee of the temple trust.
Civil Suit
Plaintiff Won