Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Girija and Vysakh.A, are the owners of the A schedule property and sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Saneesh Shankar, V.A. Nassar, and Aarifa, who they claim have unlawfully obstructed access to their property. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove their right over the access road.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit after finding that the plaintiffs did not have a legal right to access the property through the 'D' schedule road claimed to be obstructed by the defendants.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to prove continuous, open, and hostile usage of the 'D' schedule pathway for the statutory period required for easement by prescription.
The plaintiffs failed to prove continuous, open, and hostile usage of the 'D' schedule pathway for the statutory period required for easement by prescription.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs failed to prove continuous, open, and hostile usage of the 'D' schedule pathway for the statutory period required for easement by prescription.
The plaintiffs failed to prove continuous, open, and hostile usage of the 'D' schedule pathway for the statutory period required for easement by prescription.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs have failed to prove the usage and right over D schedule pathway as contended by them for the statutory period.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties are liable to suffer their respective costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Girija
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vysakh.A.
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saneesh Shankar
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- V.A. Nassar
- Party Age
- 50
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aarifa
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Agreement dated 18.03.2017, electricity receipts, certified copies of various sale deeds.
Defendants Documents
Certified copies of various sale deeds and settlement deed.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manumon A.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Vivek Varghese P.J.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing their access through plaint 'D' schedule road.
Evidence:
the plaintiffs failed to establish any legal or prescriptive right over plaint D schedule property, they are not entitled to relief of permanent prohibitory injunction.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the obstruction.
Evidence:
this Court cannot compel the defendants to remove fences or gates.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of agreement dated 18.03.2017, marked subject to objection that it is unregistered and unstamped.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Electricity Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of electricity receipt (3 in Nos).
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 4633/1987 dated 09.11.1987.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 2709/1985 dated 08.07.1985.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 3172/1999 dated 11.09.1999.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 2397/1997 dated 22.07.1997.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 2229/1984 dated 22.06.1984.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 4434/1980 dated 08.12.1980.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 110/1993 dated 11.01.1993.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 547/2017 dated 17.03.2017.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of deed No. 2866/2011 dated 27.10.2011.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of possession certificate dated 27.06.2019.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of possession certificate dated 21.07.2017.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of land tax receipt dated 18.11.2011.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original power of attorney dated 03.07.2022.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 2866/2011.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 4633/1987.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 2709/1985.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 4807/1981.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 4434/1980.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of settlement deed No. 704/2014.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report dated 11.04.2018 in I.A No. 2656/2018.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch related to commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Photographs related to commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
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 Girija vs Saneesh Shankar regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Girija vs Saneesh Shankar regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.