Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1778/2023

Case between A.R.Shaji vs Rathi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
Additional Munsiff-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-03-05
Duration
approximately-1 year 1 day
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

A.R.Shaji filed a suit seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against Rathi and Ajukumar. The case arises from a dispute over land possession and the threat of encroachment by the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. This prevents the defendants from encroaching on the plaintiff's property or disturbing the boundary.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from encroaching into the plaint A schedule properties and from making any alteration or construction or demolishing the granite boundary foundation.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. This prevents the defendants from encroaching on the plaintiff's property or disturbing the boundary.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved ownership and possession of the plaint A schedule property through evidence that remained unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved ownership and possession of the plaint A schedule property through evidence that remained unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
Having considered the oral and documentary evidence adduced from the side of plaintiff. The plaintiffs’ ownership and possession over the plaint schedule property is proved by PW1 and Exts.A1 to A9.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit is decreed as follows: (I) Restraining the defendants and their henchmen from encroaching into the plaint A schedule properties in any manner and from making any alteration or construction or from demolishing the granite boundary foundation separating plaint A and B schedule properties.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
A.R.Shaji
Party Age
59
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rathi
Party Age
65
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ajukumar
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deeds, land tax receipts, and resurvey filed measurement sketch.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Rakesh.R
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. V.K.Hemachandran
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants and their henchmen from encroaching into the plaint A schedule properties in any manner and from making any alteration or construction or from demolishing the granite boundary foundation separating plaint A and B schedule properties.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled for a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants and their henchmen from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property or its eastern granite boundary foundation in any manner.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Considering the facts and circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to realise costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
Considering the facts and circumstances, the plaintiff is entitled to realise costs of the suit from the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified Copy of Sale deed No.3315/2015 dated 16/10/2015 marked as Exhibit No.A1.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified Copy of Sale deed No.2852/2017 dated 19/10/2017 is marked as Exhibit No.A2.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified Copy of Sale deed No.2818/2017 dated 12/10/2017 is marked as Exhibit No.A3.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified Copy of Sale deed No.768/2018 dated 14/03/2018 is marked as Exhibit No.A4.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original land tax receipt bearing thandaper No.15064 dated 29/09/2023 is marked as Exhibit No.A5.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original land tax receipt bearing thandaper No.15753 dated 29/09/2023 is marked as Exhibit No.A6.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original land tax receipt bearing thandaper No.15771 dated 29/09/2023 is marked as Exhibit No.A7.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original land tax receipt bearing thandaper No.15960 dated 29/09/2023 is marked as Exhibit No.A8.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Measurement Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Resurvey filed measurement sketch of Block No.17, Resurvey No.431 dated 03/10/2023 is marked as Exhibit No.A9.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report and rough sketch is marked as Ext.C1.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between A.R.Shaji vs Rathi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between A.R.Shaji vs Rathi et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won