Case Summary
The plaintiff, Kamburath Jyothi, seeks a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Jayachandran, Sudharsan, Sarojini, Asha, Nisha, Devaki, and Preethi, to prevent them from obstructing her use of a public pathway. The case involves ownership and access rights to the plaint schedule property, which the plaintiff claims to have possessed for 30 years.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from obstructing the plaintiff's use of the path.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed, restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiff from using the plaint B schedule pathway. The defendants are ordered to pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence provided by the plaintiff established her ownership and right to use the public way.
The evidence provided by the plaintiff established her ownership and right to use the public way.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence provided by the plaintiff established her ownership and right to use the public way.
The evidence provided by the plaintiff established her ownership and right to use the public way.
Supporting Evidence
Therefore, the evidence of plaintiff would prove that there is a public way on the northern side of the plaint schedule property. As per the report of the commissioner, it is proved that the said property is being used by defendants and plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed as follows: 1The defendants are hereby restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the plaintiff in any manner from using plaint B schedule pathway.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kamburath Jyothi
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jayachandran
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sudharsan
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sarojini
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Asha
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nisha
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Partition deed No.1033/96, Settlement deed No.858/99, Karayma assignment deed No.649/10, Karayma assignment deed No.870/10, Land tax receipt, Possession certificate, Location certificate.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. AV Anvar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Shyam Padman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Harish Babu PN
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff from using the B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
The defendants are hereby restrained by way of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the plaintiff in any manner from using plaint B schedule pathway.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Costs of the suit are to be paid to the plaintiff.
Evidence:
The defendants shall pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves ownership of the A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the settlement of the property in favor of Asokan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Karayma Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates the assignment of property to Vidhupal.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Karayma Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the plaintiff's right to the A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms the tax payment for A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certifies the plaintiff's possession of the A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Location Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides the location details of the A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Reports on the inspection of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Displays the layout and way on the north of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Kamburath Jyothi vs Jayachandran et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Kamburath Jyothi vs Jayachandran et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction