Case Summary
This case involves Harmony International Projects Private Limited and its Additional Director, Sanjid Kader, against Anas and others regarding a temporary prohibitory injunction to use a pathway. The plaintiffs claim a right of way over the property of the defendants, which the defendants dispute.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition for a temporary prohibitory injunction as the plaintiffs failed to prove a prima facie case or balance of convenience in their favor.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioners did not establish a clear prima facie case for the right of way claimed.
The petitioners did not establish a clear prima facie case for the right of way claimed.
Why Defendant Won:
The petitioners did not establish a clear prima facie case for the right of way claimed.
The petitioners did not establish a clear prima facie case for the right of way claimed.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioners have not made mention of any fact as to whether or not the petitioner has any other access to the plaint A schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, IA stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Harmony International Projects Private Limited
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sanjid Kader
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o. Late Kadermon
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Anas
- Relation
- S/o. Jameela
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jameela
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Haseena
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abdul Azeez
Plaintiffs Documents
Extract of the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors, Copy of Sale Deed No. 6177/2005, and a series of photographs.
Defendants Documents
Certified copies of various documents, encumbrance certificates, land tax receipt, and Google Earth views of plaint schedule property.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Kabil Chandran T
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anjali R
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anjana Arun
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Aswin K. Benzeer
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- C. N Sreekumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Manju Paul
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anil Prasad
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Beyon T. Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anila Antony
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Akash Pallissery
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Jayanth Sreedharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioners sought a temporary prohibitory injunction against the respondents to prevent them from obstructing the B schedule property.
Evidence:
In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petition is to be dismissed and is dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Extract of the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows the authorization of the person who filed the suit to represent the plaintiff in legal matters.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Copy of sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the purchase of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This photograph shows the alleged dumping of waste materials on the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
These photographs show the alleged construction sought to be made by the respondents and the alleged B schedule pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A4 series
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report was filed for the purpose of consideration of the petition.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Certified copy of document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the respondents' ownership of their property.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Encumbrance certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document provides evidence related to the encumbrance status.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Encumbrance certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document provides evidence related to the encumbrance status.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This receipt serves as proof of tax payment for the property.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This sketch is provided without proper context or date and is of limited evidentiary value.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
These photographs relate to the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B11 series
Document Type:
Google Earth view
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
These views are provided to show the property from an aerial perspective.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type:
Google Earth view
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
These views are provided to show the property from an aerial perspective.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type:
Google Earth view
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
These views are provided to show the property from an aerial perspective.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This sketch was prepared at the request of the respondent and is not from the court.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This receipt is related to a transaction conducted by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B16
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This receipt is related to a transaction conducted by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B17
Document Type:
Copy of complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows the complaint filed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B18
Document Type:
Receipt of Acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This receipt provides evidence of the acknowledgment of the complaint.
Reference:
Ext.B19
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This certificate indicates possession related to the defendant's property.
Reference:
Ext.B20
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 Harmony International Projects Private Limited vs Anas et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Harmony International Projects Private Limited vs Anas et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction