Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 1563/2024

Case between M/s. Adrak Builders & Developers Private Limited vs T.S. Jayaprakash regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -III
Judge
Smt. Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-01-17
Duration
approximately-1 year 26 days
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves M/s. Adrak Builders & Developers Private Limited seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against T.S. Jayaprakash to prevent him from trespassing on their property. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant attempted to intrude upon their property, which they claim to own and enjoy.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court has directed the parties to maintain the status quo regarding the plaint schedule properties until the final disposal of the suit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary prohibitory injunction to maintain status quo
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court has directed the parties to maintain the status quo regarding the plaint schedule properties until the final disposal of the suit.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found it necessary to preserve the status quo pending the trial due to the plaintiff's claims of ownership and potential harm from trespass.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The court emphasized the need to maintain the status quo in order to protect the plaintiff from potential, irreparable harm while the case is pending.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result the application is disposed by directing the parties to maintain status quo in the interest of justice till the final disposal of the suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M/s. Adrak Builders & Developers Private Limited
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
T.S. Jayaprakash
Party Age
65
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No.3453/12, Original tax receipts
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No.1618/2001, Copy of tax receipt, Copy of complaint to ADM/Collector, Copy of notice to Jayaprakash

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Amar Dileep
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Anaswaradeepthi. V. V
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. S. S. Dileep Raj
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Temporary Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought a temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendant from trespassing and disturbing the possession of the plaint schedule properties.
Evidence:
the application is disposed by directing the parties to maintain status quo in the interest of justice till the final disposal of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.3453/12 pertaining to plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original tax receipt dated 31/07/2024 pertaining to plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original tax receipt dated 31/07/2024 pertaining to plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.5/2013 pertaining to remaining property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original tax receipt dated 31/07/2024 pertaining to the property described in Ext.A4.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.1618/2001 pertaining to defendant's property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of tax receipt dated 19/04/2021 related to the property of the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Complaint
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of complaint to ADM/Collector, Thiruvananthapuram by the respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of notice dated 24/07/2024 to defendant Jayaprakash.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Original notice dated 08/08/2024 from Thiruvananthapuram Taluk office.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of notice dated 31/08/2024 from Thiruvananthapuram Taluk office.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Original notice dated 12/09/2024 from Thiruvananthapuram Taluk office.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Report
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of report from Sasthamangalam Village office dated 25/09/2024.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Original notice to Jayaprakash from Taluk Office, Thiruvananthapuram dated 14/10/2024.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report, Mahazar and rough sketch regarding plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1 series

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between M/s. Adrak Builders & Developers Private Limited vs T.S. Jayaprakash regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between M/s. Adrak Builders & Developers Private Limited vs T.S. Jayaprakash regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Sat, 01/20/2024 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won