Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S.No156/2024

Case between Frederick Francis vs Sajin Frederick regarding boundary wall and consequential reliefs.

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Judge
Sri. Manesh. S.V
Order Date
2025-06-30
Duration
approximately-1 year 21 days
Case Code No.
156
Case Closed
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Frederick Francis suing his son, Sajin Frederick, for the construction of a boundary wall on their property to prevent damage from strangers. The court found that the plaintiff had not taken necessary steps to demarcate the property boundaries.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff failed to identify and demarcate the property boundaries, which was essential for the relief sought.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff failed to identify and demarcate the property boundaries, which was essential for the relief sought.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Frederick Francis
Party Age
72
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sajin Frederick
Party Age
42
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Settlement deed No.40/2024/I, Settlement deed No.3123/2014
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Shoby Joseph.Y
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant.
Evidence:
Without properly identifying and demarcating the plaint schedule properties, the relief of permanent prohibitory injunction prayed for also cannot be granted.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Putting up of boundary wall in the Eastern side of the plaint A schedule property and Northern side of the plaint B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
So the relief prayed for putting up boundary in the Eastern side of the plaint A schedule property and in the Northern side of the plaint B schedule property cannot be granted.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a settlement deed that supports the plaintiff's claim for a boundary wall.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a settlement deed relevant to the plaintiff's ownership and claims concerning the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO
Case Code Year
2024

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Sun, 06/09/2024 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
70%

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