O.S No. 1061/2024

Case between George Samuel Kutty et al vs Nayana Krishna Kumar et al regarding car parking rights

Court
THE MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2025-04-10
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

George Samuel Kutty and others filed a petition against Nayana Krishna Kumar and Asset Homes Pvt Ltd regarding their rights to use car parking spaces in a commercial building. The plaintiffs allege unlawful obstruction by the defendants concerning common parking areas.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for temporary prohibitory injunction was allowed, thereby restraining the respondents from obstructing the plaintiffs and their tenants in using the parking spaces.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from obstructing parking
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for temporary prohibitory injunction was allowed, thereby restraining the respondents from obstructing the plaintiffs and their tenants in using the parking spaces.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs were found to have a prima facie case as their rights to use the common parking spaces were established through valid sale deeds.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The balance of convenience in granting this petition for interim prohibitory injunction is therefore clearly in favour of the petitioners since they cannot be deprived of a right which has been specifically provided in their sale deeds.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, petition is allowed. The respondents, their men and agents are hereby restrained from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs and their tenants in parking their vehicles in plaint B schedule parking spaces till the disposal of this suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
George Samuel Kutty
Party Age
67
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Annamma James
Party Age
57
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Robin James
Party Age
33
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Joy Varghese
Party Age
54
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sindhu Subramanian
Party Age
51
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Nayana Krishna Kumar
Party Age
67
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s Asset Homes Pvt Ltd
Relation
represented by its Managing Director V Sunil Kumar
Plaintiffs Documents
True copy of the agreement to build, True copy of the agreement for sale, True copy of Sale deed no. 3637/12 of Tripunithura SRO, True copy of Sale deed no. 3638/12 of Tripunithura SRO, True copy of Sale deed no. 775/13 of Tripunithura SRO, True copy of the Sale deed no. 3636/12 of Tripunithura SRO, True copy of the plaint in OS 555/23 on the file of the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam.
Defendants Documents
Copy of Memorandum of understanding, Plan A and Plan B showing car parking allocation.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
V.A.Johnson
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Eldho Cherian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Hari Krishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Naveen A Varkey
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Cyriac Tom
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Eldhos M Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Shahul Hameed P.N
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Shajin Sha Ismail
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Peeyus A Kottam
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Arjun S Benedict
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Issac Alexander
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Vishnu S Kunnel
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anto George
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Emil Hanna Thomas
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Temporary prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents from obstructing the plaintiffs and their tenants from parking in the designated spaces.
Evidence:
Hence the petition is allowed. The respondents, their men and agents are hereby restrained from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs and their tenants in parking their vehicles in plaint B schedule parking spaces till the disposal of this suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Agreement to build
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed on 12.02.2012, this agreement allows for construction in favor of the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Agreement for sale
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed on 12.02.2012, this agreement details the sale aspects related to the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Sale Deed No. 3637/12 documenting the sale to the third plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Sale Deed No. 3638/12 documenting the sale to the second plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Sale Deed No. 775/13 documenting the sale to the fifth plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Sale Deed No. 3636/12 documenting the sale to the fourth plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Plaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the plaint in OS 555/23 related to the current disputes.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of Power of Attorney executed for the case.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another True copy of Power of Attorney executed for the case.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Plan
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Shows the configuration of car parking allotted to purchasers.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Memorandum of Understanding
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Details the initial agreement concerning property rights and structures.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Filed to provide evidence in the ongoing disputes.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between George Samuel Kutty et al vs Nayana Krishna Kumar et al regarding car parking rights
Case Code Year
Case between George Samuel Kutty et al vs Nayana Krishna Kumar et al regarding car parking rights

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 04/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won