Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S 157/2021

Case between K.S. Chandralekha vs Vijayachandran Nair et al regarding fixation of boundary and permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
The Court of the Munsiff, Kanjirappally
Judge
Smitha Susan Mathew
Order Date
2025-06-30
Duration
approximately-4 years 28 days
Case Code No.
157
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

K.S. Chandralekha filed a suit against Vijayachandran Nair and the Public in 17th Ward of Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath seeking to fix the boundary of her property and prevent the defendants from trespassing. The plaintiff claims that the defendants are attempting to widen a pathway that encroaches on her property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed in favor of K.S. Chandralekha. The court fixed the western boundary of her property and granted a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants preventing them from trespassing.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of K.S. Chandralekha. The court fixed the western boundary of her property and granted a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants preventing them from trespassing.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence to establish her claim over the property and there was no evidence presented by the defendants to dispute her ownership.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence to establish her claim over the property and there was no evidence presented by the defendants to dispute her ownership.
Supporting Evidence
The failed attempt of 1st defendant to establish that some portion of the kayyala is projecting into item No.2 would support the allegation of plaintiff that defendants are attempting to increase the width of item No.2.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. The western boundary of the plaint schedule item No.1 property is fixed through 'aed1' line as shown in Ext.C1(a) plan. 2. A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property...

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
K.S. Chandralekha
Party Age
49
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vijayachandran Nair
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Public in 17th Ward of Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath
Party Age
48
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of partition deed No. 1292/2000 of the SRO, Vazhoor; Tax receipt Thandaper No. 5812, issued from Village Office, Chirakkadavu.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Alex J. Edackkattu
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
D.Biju
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is granted restraining the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Fixation of the western boundary of plaint schedule item No.1 property.
Evidence:
The western boundary of the plaint schedule item No.1 property is fixed through ‘aed1’ line as shown in Ext.C1 (a) plan.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the partition deed to prove ownership of item No.1 property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Land tax receipts corresponding to plaint schedule item No.1 property to prove possession.
Reference:
Ext.A2 and Ext.A2(a)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report filed to support the plaintiff's claims regarding property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Survey Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Survey plan delineating property boundaries and supporting the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2021

Quick Facts

Location
Kanjirappally
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Case Filed
Wed, 06/30/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Thu, 05/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Abraham Mathew et al vs Suresh Raman et al regarding suit dismissal
Court of the Munsiff, Kanjirappally
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Union Bank of India vs Dhanya S., Silamban M. et al regarding non-payment of court fee.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Anilkumar vs Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayath regarding withdrawal of suit.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Joseph Antony et al vs C. M. M Educational and Charitable Trust regarding Interlocutory Application
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Anilkumar vs Chirakkadavu Grama Panchayat regarding withdrawal of suit.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won