Case Summary
The plaintiff, Chandrasekharan, is involved in a case against the defendants regarding a dispute over property possession. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants trespassed and damaged his property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants except the third defendant, who was dismissed due to the plaintiff's failure to take steps against him.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established his case as the defendants' presence remained undisputed.
The plaintiff established his case as the defendants' presence remained undisputed.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established his case as the defendants' presence remained undisputed.
The plaintiff established his case as the defendants' presence remained undisputed.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has established a case in his favour. Since, the defendants 1, 2, 4 to 8 are proceeded exparte, the case of the plaintiff stands unchallenged and undisputed.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs against D1 to D8 except D3. The suit is dismissed against D3.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- CHANDRASEKHARAN
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SAVITHA
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- VAISHNA
- Party Age
- 20
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SAJEESH
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- SANTHOSH
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- RAMESAN
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Gift Deed No. 436/1986 of SRO, Edachery, Basic Tax Receipt issued by Village Office, Purameri to Chandrasekharan.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M. Siju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Divya. K. K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff requested a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from trespassing and altering the plaint property.
Evidence:
The defendants 1 to 8 except D3 their men, agents and workers are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Gift Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document establishes the plaintiff's ownership of the property in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the plaintiff's claim of being the possessor of the plaint property as he is paying taxes on it.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The court relied on this report to assess the situation regarding the plaint property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The sketch plan was used by the court to understand the layout and boundaries relating to the plaint property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between CHANDRASEKHARAN vs SAVITHA et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between CHANDRASEKHARAN vs SAVITHA et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction