Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 1152/2017

Case between Jasmine et al vs Abdul Rahim P.K et al regarding injunction

Court
I Additional Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2024-10-25
Duration
approximately-7 years 0 days
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants to prevent them from obstructing a public road that the plaintiffs claim they have a right to use. The defendants deny this, asserting they still own the road and it is not public.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiffs failed to prove their claims regarding the path becoming public. The defendants retained ownership and the claim for an injunction was not substantiated.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiffs failed to prove their claims regarding the path becoming public. The defendants retained ownership and the claim for an injunction was not substantiated.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs could not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims regarding the pathway.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs could not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims regarding the pathway.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has failed to substantiate the contentions made through cogent and reliable evidence.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Jasmine
Party Age
50
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Hameed
Party Age
54
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Abdul Karim
Party Age
47
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Rasiya M.R
Party Age
28
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Rameena M.R
Party Age
27
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Abdul Rahim P.K
Party Age
56
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Safia
Party Age
52
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copies of various deeds from SRO Edapally and other documents related to the case.
Defendants Documents
Replies under the Right to Information Act from Kalamassery Municipality.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.B.Sandeep
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.M.Aliyar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sherin Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sreeja K.R
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
C.AnilKumar Kalleseril
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Frijo K Sundaram
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Hirusheekesan S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a permanent prohibitory injunction from the court to restrain the defendants from blocking the road or obstructing traffic.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs believe that the defendants, particularly the first defendant, who is described as influential and powerful, are likely to cause more mischief and further obstruction of the road.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
The issue regarding costs.
Evidence:
No peculiar situation has transpired in this suit to deviate from the normal rule that costs shall follow the event.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the deed no. 7281/94 of SRO, Edapally.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the deed no. 1174/96 of SRO, Edapally.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the deed no. 4448/96 of SRO, Edapally.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Title deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the deed no. 3460/00 of SRO, Edapally.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the land tax receipt issued by the V.O, Thrikkakara North.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Municipal Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the order no. P.W.19503.16 issued by the Assistant Engineer, Kalamassery Municipality (subject to proof).
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the reply having no. PW/AP10/16569/17 from the public information officer, Kalamassery Municipality (subject to proof).
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of the reply having no. J/12599/16 issued by the public information officer, Kalamassery Municipality including the Municipality minutes dated 04.11.17 (subject to proof).
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the commission report filed by Adv. Sajen Thampan in IA 6905/17.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Reply bearing no. PW/19376/17 issued by the public information officer, Kalamassery Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Reply bearing no. PW1/AP10/20434/17 issued by the public information officer, Kalamassery Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Explanation Letter
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Explanation letter bearing no. PW/20433/17 issued by the Secretary, Kalamassery Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Land Relinquishment Application
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Land relinquishment application – Form B (Rule 7).
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed by Adv. Sajen Thampan.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Photographs.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Document Type: C.D
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
C.D.
Reference:
Ext.C1(c)
Document Type: ID Card
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of the ID card of PW2.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type: ID Card
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of the ID card of PW3.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Document Type: Municipal Note File
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Note file bearing no. PW/7977/2020 the Municipal Secretary, Kalamassery regarding the construction of drainage in ward no.40, Muttar-Vinobhaji road, 2nd by lane.
Reference:
Ext.X3
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Oral deposition of PW1 to PW5.
Reference:

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 Jasmine et al vs Abdul Rahim P.K et al regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Jasmine et al vs Abdul Rahim P.K et al regarding injunction

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Sun, 01/01/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Tue, 10/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Thu, 10/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

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