Case Summary
Francis Pereira filed a suit against Manoj and others regarding a dispute over property boundaries and illegal demolition of a wall. The plaintiff claims to have the rightful possession of the property and seeks protection from the defendants' actions.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from trespassing on the property and demolishing any part of the surrounding walls.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established lawful ownership, possession, and enjoyment of the property and the need for legal protection against continuous infringements.
The plaintiff established lawful ownership, possession, and enjoyment of the property and the need for legal protection against continuous infringements.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established lawful ownership, possession, and enjoyment of the property and the need for legal protection against continuous infringements.
The plaintiff established lawful ownership, possession, and enjoyment of the property and the need for legal protection against continuous infringements.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has made out a prima facie case in his favour. The balance of convenience also lies with the plaintiff, as he is the lawful possessor of the property and any continued obstruction or interference by the defendants would disturb his peaceful enjoyment.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result; the suit is decreed as follows: (a) Let the defendants and their henchmen be perpetually restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from causing any obstruction to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the said property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Francis Pereira
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Manoj
- Party Age
- 50
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sunil
- Party Age
- 45
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Santhi
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3599/2013, Tax receipt
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Kollemcode D.S. Jayachandran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Arun.S.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession.
Evidence:
Let the defendants and their henchmen be perpetually restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, from causing any obstruction to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the said property.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained from demolishing or attempting to demolish any portion of the compound wall surrounding the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Let the defendants and their henchmen be perpetually restrained from demolishing or attempting to demolish any portion of the compound wall surrounding the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Costs were requested but no order was made.
Evidence:
Considering the nature of the suit, there shall be no order as to costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 3599/2013 establishes the plaintiff's ownership and lawful possession of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original tax receipt dated 12/01/2024 evidences the plaintiff's payment of land tax, supporting his claim of possession.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report illustrates the damages caused by the defendants and supports the plaintiff's claims regarding unlawful acts.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch accompanying the commission report provides visual evidence of the property layout and damage.
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
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2024