Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 955/2024

Case between Smt. Gauri Sukumaran vs Seena Bharghavan regarding mandatory injunction and damages

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-12-19
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Smt. Gauri Sukumaran, claims ownership of the property and seeks a mandatory injunction to evict the defendant, Seena Bharghavan, who is unlawfully occupying the premises. The defendant argues that she has rights over the property as it is a shared household.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to vacate the plaint schedule property. The defendant's claims to rights over the property were found to be without merit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction to vacate the plaint schedule property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to vacate the plaint schedule property. The defendant's claims to rights over the property were found to be without merit.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved her ownership of the property and established that the defendant had only permissive occupation, which was not legally valid.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The case that is raised by the plaintiff is that the defendant is having only permissive occupation in the plaint schedule property and that such aspect has been clearly pleaded in the plaint and that even though such specific pleading had been made as regards to permissive occupation of the defendant in the plaint schedule property, there is no specific denial of the same in the written statement.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is partly decreed as follows: The defendant is directed by a decree of mandatory injunction to vacate the plaint schedule property and put the plaintiff in possession of the same.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Smt. Gauri Sukumaran
Party Age
85
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Seena Bharghavan
Party Age
52
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale Deed No. 1873/2005, Lawyer Notice, Postal Receipt
Defendants Documents
Certificate issued by Jayanthi Road - Residents Association, True copy of Order in CMP No. 3900/2024 in M.C No. 41/2024

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Dinesh Rao A
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Yohaan K. Xavier
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K. Manuraj
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sakhi Gopalan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Law Firm
Legal Aid Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Directing the defendant to vacate the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed by a decree of mandatory injunction to vacate the plaint schedule property and put the plaintiff in possession of the same.
Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Direct the defendant to pay ₹25,000 per month as mesne profits/damages for the use and occupation of the plaint schedule property from the date of the suit.
Evidence:
Claim for damages as sought for in the suit at hand is without any merits.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Direct the defendant to pay the full costs of the proceedings.
Evidence:
The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the ownership of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notifies the defendant of the termination of the license and demands vacation of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of sending the lawyer's notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Computer print out of Track Consignment
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Computer print out of Discharge Summary
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Certificate issued by Residents Association
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
To support the defendant's position regarding residency.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: True copy of Order in CMP
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Supports the defendant's claim of rights over the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2

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 Smt. Gauri Sukumaran vs Seena Bharghavan regarding mandatory injunction and damages
Case Code Year
Case between Smt. Gauri Sukumaran vs Seena Bharghavan regarding mandatory injunction and damages

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 12/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won