Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 1359/2017

Case between Smt. Sheela Rajendran vs Sri. Sundaran et al regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Judge
SMT. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2025-06-05
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Smt. Sheela Rajendran, a widow, is suing local musclemen and her sister-in-laws for trespassing and harassment concerning her inherited property. She seeks a permanent injunction to prevent them from interfering with her rental business and personal peace.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, preventing them from trespassing and interfering with the plaintiff's rights over the property. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs from the defendants.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the defendants and their men and agents from trespassing into any portion of the plaint schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, preventing them from trespassing and interfering with the plaintiff's rights over the property. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs from the defendants.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff had the legal right over the property based on the evidence presented, including the original release deed and other supporting documents.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiff had the legal right over the property based on the evidence presented, including the original release deed and other supporting documents.
Supporting Evidence
The unrebutted oral testimony of PW1 and Exts. A1 to A4 established her case as pleaded by her. It shows that the plaintiff has got right over plaint schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed as follows. A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the defendants and their men and agents from trespassing into any portion of the plaint schedule property and from doing any acts detrimental to the plaintiff and her minor children's right, title, interest and possession and peaceful enjoyment over the plaint schedule property.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Smt. Sheela Rajendran
Party Age
43
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sri. Sundaran
Party Age
48
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sathishkumar.T.N.
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Smt. Sunandakumari @ Sunanda Janardhanan
Party Age
52
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Smt. Prasanna Dileep
Party Age
44
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Smt. Nirmala @ Nirmala Krishnankutty
Party Age
42
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original release deed No.1481/2008, Original tax receipt, Original possession certificate, Original partition deed No.2689/1997
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Varghese P. Chacko
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sreekala K.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Tincy M.B.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Rajesh K. Raju
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the property.
Evidence:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction is passed restraining the defendants and their men and agents from trespassing into any portion of the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Entitlement of the plaintiff to recover costs from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize costs of the suit from the defendants and from their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Release deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original release deed establishing property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt supporting plaintiff's claims regarding property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Possession Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Possession certificate validating plaintiff's right to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Partition deed further supporting the plaintiff's claim over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Unrebutted oral testimony of the plaintiff establishing her case.
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 Smt. Sheela Rajendran vs Sri. Sundaran et al regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Smt. Sheela Rajendran vs Sri. Sundaran et al regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction

Case Flags

Arrest Involved

Quick Facts

Location
ERNAKULAM
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

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