Case Summary
The plaintiff, John Panicker, filed a suit against D. Thomaskutty and others for fixation of boundary and recovery of possession of land encroached upon by the defendant. A counterclaim was also filed by the defendant for injunction regarding the use of a public pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Partial
Relief Granted
The counterclaim plaintiff is entitled to realise the costs of the suit from the counter-claim defendant.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is dismissed, while the counterclaim is allowed in part.
Key Reasoning:
The counter-claim plaintiff sufficiently established the right to use the counter-claim B schedule property.
The counter-claim plaintiff sufficiently established the right to use the counter-claim B schedule property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The counter claim plaintiff had established that there is a potential threat against him and that the counter claim defendant is under a legal obligation not to disturb the counter claim plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. And the counter claim is allowed in part.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- John Panicker
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- D. Thomaskutty
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sangeetha
- Relation
- Working as Asst.Engineer
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nirmala Francis
- Relation
- Working as Asst.Executive Engineer
Plaintiffs Documents
Settlement Deed Nos. 274/1983 and 5949/1995, Tax receipt dated 27/05/2013.
Defendants Documents
Sale deed No. 4453/1992, Release deed No. 349/1996.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dilar Deep.P.N
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P Sudhakaran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Law Firm
- Government Pleader
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant regarding the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
The suit is dismissed.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought recovery of possession of plaint B schedule property from the defendant.
Evidence:
The suit is dismissed.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Partly Granted
Description:
The counter claim plaintiff sought a decree of mandatory injunction not to cause obstruction to the use of counter claim B schedule property.
Evidence:
The counter claim Defendant is hereby restrained from causing any obstruction to the use of the counter claim B schedule property by the counter claim plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of settlement deed No. 274/1983 establishing the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of settlement deed No. 5949/1995 establishing the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Land tax receipt confirming payment for the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Re-Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of re-survey plan relating to the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No. 4453/1992 relating to the counter-claim plaintiff's property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of release deed No. 349/1996 confirming the counter-claim plaintiff's ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report prepared by Adv. Girijakumari.S regarding the property boundary.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Mahazar prepared by Adv. Girijakumari.S during the commission.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan prepared by Surveyor for the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report prepared by Adv. Commissioner, Jasmine.M.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Mahazar
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Mahazar prepared by Adv. Commissioner, Jasmine.M.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
From notice under S9(3) and S 10 of the Kerala Land Acquisition, 1961.
Reference:
X1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Boundary Dispute
Case Code
Case between John Panicker vs D. Thomaskutty et al regarding fixation of boundary and injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between John Panicker vs D. Thomaskutty et al regarding fixation of boundary and injunction.