Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Sindhu and Pushpavathi Amma, are seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Bibin and Vikraman, to prevent encroachment on their property. The plaintiffs claim that the defendants attempted to encroach into their property and commit waste.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendants from encroaching on the plaint schedule property and committing any acts of waste.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established their case through unchallenged oral and documentary evidence.
The plaintiffs established their case through unchallenged oral and documentary evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs established their case through unchallenged oral and documentary evidence.
The plaintiffs established their case through unchallenged oral and documentary evidence.
Supporting Evidence
Through the unchallenged oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs have established their case.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and the defendants are restrained from encroaching into the plaint schedule property and committing any act of waste therein.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sindhu
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Pushpavathi Amma
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Bibin
- Party Age
- 36
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vikraman
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- F/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of settlement deed No. 2569/2006 of Varkala S.R.O., Tax receipt dated 03.02.2022.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. S. Sunil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Javad. S.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants to restrain them from encroaching onto the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and the defendants are restrained from encroaching into the plaint schedule property and committing any act of waste therein.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
The plaintiffs requested costs in the suit.
Evidence:
No order as to costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the plaintiffs' ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the payment of tax by the first plaintiff for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This report provides findings relevant to the defendants' actions regarding the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This sketch visually represents the layout of the plaint schedule property in relation to the defendants' claims.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sindhu et al vs Bibin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sindhu et al vs Bibin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction