Case Summary
The plaintiffs are seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant for allegedly attempting to block their access to a private pathway. The defendant has constructed a building, which the plaintiffs claim encroaches on their pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiffs failed to make out a case for the relief sought.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs did not prove their claims regarding the width of the pathway or the alleged blocking.
The plaintiffs did not prove their claims regarding the width of the pathway or the alleged blocking.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs did not prove their claims regarding the width of the pathway or the alleged blocking.
The plaintiffs did not prove their claims regarding the width of the pathway or the alleged blocking.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs did not produce sufficient evidence to establish their claims. The defendant had demonstrated compliance with statutory requirements and had not encroached upon the plaintiffs' property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. No costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Thankkamani
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- D/o. Late Velu
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sarasa
- Party Age
- 74
- Relation
- D/o. Late Velu
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rathnam
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- D/o. Late Velu
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abhimon
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o. Not known
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 4823/1992, Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 8844/2004
Defendants Documents
Receipt issued by Secretary, Kalamassery Municipality, Land tax receipt issued by Thrikkakara North Village Office, Notice of Inspection issued by the Taluk Surveyor, Kanayannur
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nelson Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Johnson Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Vishnu Prasad.P
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Athira T.S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought to restrain the defendant from encroaching on the pathway.
Evidence:
Hence PW1 had not made out any case to grant injunction in his favour.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Plaintiff claims ownership and possession of the property based on this sale deed.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document supports plaintiff's claim regarding the width and use of the pathway.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Establishes the defendant's title and possession of property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Shows defendant is paying land tax, indicating ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Notice of Inspection
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Related to the survey conducted on the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court's report regarding the measurements and conditions of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual representation accompanying the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
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 Thankkamani et al vs Abhimon regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Thankkamani et al vs Abhimon regarding permanent prohibitory injunction