Case Summary
Mr. Abraham Varghese, the plaintiff, is seeking an injunction against Mr. Sunny Paulose, the defendant, to prevent him from trespassing on his property. The case involves allegations of unauthorized access and damage to the plaintiff's property by the defendant.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit, concluding that there was insufficient evidence to grant the injunction sought against the defendant. The plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant was attempting to trespass or create a new pathway through the property.
The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant was attempting to trespass or create a new pathway through the property.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant was attempting to trespass or create a new pathway through the property.
The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant was attempting to trespass or create a new pathway through the property.
Supporting Evidence
The court is satisfied that there is no merits in the contentions of the plaintiff and even though plaintiff is owner in possession of plaint schedule properties, he cannot seek an injunction against the defendant only because the defendant has himself admitted that he has no intention to trespass into the plaint property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mr. Abraham Varghese
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Sunny Paulose
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed no. 1261/78, Copy of tax receipt, Copy of Possession Certificate no. 34243187
Defendants Documents
Copy of complaint filed before the president, Mulanthuruthy Grama Panchayath, Acknowledgment receipt for the complaint, Copy of complaint made by the defendant before the Circle Inspector of Police, Acknowledgment receipt of petition filed before Mulanthuruthy Police Station
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Varghese P Chacko
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Pramod Kuchuthoman E
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant to prevent trespass.
Evidence:
Therefore, from the evidence adduced, this court is satisfied that there is no merits in the contentions of the plaintiff.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction to restore the demolished compound wall.
Evidence:
Therefore this court is not inclined to grant any mandatory injunction in this case.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To show ownership and possession of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To support the claim of possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
To confirm the plaintiff's legal ownership and possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
To show the defendant's formal complaint regarding the issues with the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
To confirm the complaint filed by the defendant with the Panchayat.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
To evidence the complaint made by the defendant with the police regarding the issues.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
To confirm the filing of the complaint at the police station.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To provide evidence related to the site inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To visually represent the area relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To provide further details on the site inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To visually illustrate the area of dispute.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type:
Photographs
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To provide visual evidence related to the conditions of the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C2(b)-C2(l)
Document Type:
Compact Disc
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
To store visual evidence pertinent to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C2(m)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Witness testimonies presented during the hearing.
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 Mr. Abraham Varghese vs Mr. Sunny Paulose regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Mr. Abraham Varghese vs Mr. Sunny Paulose regarding injunction