Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1496/2017

Case between B. Geethakumary vs P.S. Sarada Amma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-03-29
Duration
approximately-7 years 6 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

B. Geethakumary filed a suit against P.S. Sarada Amma for a permanent prohibitory injunction and other consequential reliefs concerning a property dispute. The case involved issues of boundary construction and the legality of encroachment.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the counter claim in favor of P.S. Sarada Amma, ordering B. Geethakumary to demolish a portion of the concreted retaining wall and restraining her from trespassing into the counter claim schedule property.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction to demolish concreted portion and restraining order against trespassing.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the counter claim in favor of P.S. Sarada Amma, ordering B. Geethakumary to demolish a portion of the concreted retaining wall and restraining her from trespassing into the counter claim schedule property.
Key Reasoning:
The evidence supported the ownership and possession of the counter claim properties by P.S. Sarada Amma.
Why Defendant Won:
The evidence supported the ownership and possession of the counter claim properties by P.S. Sarada Amma.
Supporting Evidence
Upon considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the counter claim plaintiff, it is quite evident that counter claim plaintiff got title and possession over the counter claim schedule properties.

Judgment Evidence:

The counter claim is decreed as follows: (I) The counter claim defendant is directed to demolish the concreted portion touching the existing retaining wall within a period of 3 months from the date of decree. (II) The counter claim plaintiff is allowed to put up compound wall over the retaining wall.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
B. Geethakumary
Party Age
54
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P.S. Sarada Amma
Party Age
71
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Power of Attorney, Certified copy of Gift Deed No. 1486/1964, Certified copy of Release Deed No. 698/1983, Tax Receipts.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Deepu.U.V
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Arunjith.A.L
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Bharath Vijay.V.G
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. N. Chandrasekharan Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Counter claim defendant is restrained from trespassing into the counter claim schedule property.
Evidence:
The counter claim defendant is restrained from trespassing into the counter claim schedule property through a permanent prohibitory injunction.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Counter claim defendant is directed to demolish the concreted portion of the existing retaining wall touching the eastern side of counter claim properties.
Evidence:
The counter claim defendant is directed to demolish the concreted portion of (20-40 c.m) width touching the existing retaining wall of the defendant on the eastern side of counter claim properties within a period of 3 months from the date of decree.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document supports the defendant's claims and testimony in court.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Certified Copy of Gift Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes ownership and title of the counter claim plaintiff over the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Certified copy of Release Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Supports the counter claim plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides proof of tax payment related to the counter claim property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides additional proof of tax payment related to the counter claim property.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Certificate issued by the Village Officer
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certifies property ownership pertaining to the counter claim plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Copy of complaint
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Documents prior legal complaints filed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Copy of complaint
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Documents another legal complaint filed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Copy of Complaint and its receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Documents legal actions taken by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B9 Series
Document Type: Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes legal precedence relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type: Reply received from Irrigation Department under the Right to Information Act
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides information relevant to the jurisdictional issues in the case.
Reference:
Ext.B11 Series
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Contains findings of the commission regarding the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Visual representation of the property in question as per the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)

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 B. Geethakumary vs P.S. Sarada Amma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between B. Geethakumary vs P.S. Sarada Amma regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Wed, 03/29/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

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