Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Ajith Raveendran Kumar and Sajitha Ajith Raveendran, filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction concerning property disputes with the defendants, Sadasivan and others. The case revolves around the obstruction of natural water flow due to construction activities.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree is granted against the defendants restraining them from encroaching plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a decree for a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, ensuring that the defendants cannot obstruct the natural flow of water and deleting any unauthorized construction on the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court established that the plaintiffs had the right to the natural flow of water and the defendants had obstructed that flow unlawfully.
The court established that the plaintiffs had the right to the natural flow of water and the defendants had obstructed that flow unlawfully.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court established that the plaintiffs had the right to the natural flow of water and the defendants had obstructed that flow unlawfully.
The court established that the plaintiffs had the right to the natural flow of water and the defendants had obstructed that flow unlawfully.
Supporting Evidence
The terrain of the area where the plaint schedule properties are located slopes from the South to the North and also inclines to the West.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result the suit and counterclaim are decreed in part as follows: A decree is granted against the defendants restraining them from encroaching plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ajith Raveendran Kumar
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sajitha Ajith Raveendran
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sadasivan
- Party Age
- 65
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chandramathi
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Salini
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sajini
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney executed by Ajith Raveendran Kumar and Sajitha Ajith Raveendran in favour of Santhoshkumar P.R., Sale Deed No.1250/18 of Erumeli SRO, Land Tax receipt No.KL05020709752/2024 of Erumeli South Village.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No.1721/18 of Erumeli SRO, Land Tax receipt No. KL05020715168/2022 of Erumeli South Village, Certified copy of Sale Deed No.755/1991 of Erumeli SRO.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Bilu. G.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Saju Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining defendants from encroaching on the plaint schedule item No.1 property and obstructing natural water flow.
Evidence:
A decree is granted against the defendants restraining them from encroaching plaint schedule item No.1 property, obstructing the natural flow of water through the private road.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Directing counterclaim defendants to remove obstruction causing the flow of water from South to North.
Evidence:
A mandatory injunction is granted directing Counterclaim defendants / plaintiff to remove the obstruction which caused the natural flow of water from the South to North through the private road.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed by Ajith Raveendran Kumar and Sajitha Ajith Raveendran in favour of Santhoshkumar P.R.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves plaintiffs’ claim over plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Corresponding land tax receipt for the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Certified copy of Sale Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes that defendant 4 is the owner of counterclaim item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Produced by defendants to show ownership related to counterclaim.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Certified copy of Sale Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Shows that Sreekumar was the title holder of property related to the case.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed by Advocate Commissioner regarding the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed alongside the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Subject to proof but relevant to the evidence presented.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Subject to proof and relevant to the evidence presented.
Reference:
Ext.C1(c)
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Subject to proof and relevant to the evidence presented.
Reference:
Ext.C1(d)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed regarding the properties in question.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Filed along with the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Obstructing natural flow of water
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2021