Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1196/2012

Case between Aloysius E.Gomez et al vs Maglin Lobo regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-03-29
Duration
approximately-12 years 9 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Aloysius E. Gomez and his wife Mary Lobo filed a suit against Maglin Lobo regarding obstruction in a public pathway. The plaintiffs sought a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent the defendant from constructing a roof over a portion of the pathway.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted the injunction sought by the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from obstructing the pathway and directed the restoration of the original status of the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendant is restrained from constructing roof over the plaint C schedule property or from obstructing the plaintiffs from enjoying the entire northern boundary of the plaint A schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted the injunction sought by the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from obstructing the pathway and directed the restoration of the original status of the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence that the defendant was causing obstruction in a public way.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The evidence on record would prove that the defendant has no right to encroach upon the public way and construct brick wall therein.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit decreed as follows: The defendant is restrained from constructing roof over the plaint C schedule property or to do any kind of activity reducing the same into a room.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Aloysius E.Gomez
Party Age
57
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mary Lobo
Party Age
49
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Maglin Lobo
Party Age
44
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 4225/08, Original Tax Receipt, Certified copy of Settlement Deed No. 40/2010, Original Tax Receipt, Original Ownership certificate of building bearing TC No. 30/986, Original Tax Receipt bearing TC No. 30/985, Certified copy of rough sketch, Original receipt of complaint before Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Rajesh kumar.K
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. G.Udayabhanu
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Kowdiar S. Mohandas
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Mridul John Mathew
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is restrained from constructing roof over the plaint C schedule property or to do any kind of activity reducing the same into a room.
Evidence:
The suit decreed as follows: The defendant is restrained from constructing roof over the plaint C schedule property or to do any kind of activity reducing the same into a room.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is directed to restore the original status of the plaint C schedule property within a period of three months.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed to restore the original status of the plaint C schedule property within a period of three months.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is restrained from grabbing any portion of the public pathway lying on the north of the plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendant is restrained from grabbing any portion of the public pathway lying on the north of the plaint A schedule property or from obstructing the plaintiffs from enjoying the same as access to the entire northern boundary of the plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained from installing any gate or making any construction in plaint B schedule pathway in such a way as to obstruct the plaintiff’s peaceful use and enjoyment of B schedule pathway.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained from installing any gate or making any construction in plaint B schedule pathway in such a way as to obstruct the plaintiff’s peaceful use and enjoyment of B schedule pathway for access to A schedule property.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to realise the cost of the suit from the defendants and their assets.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to realise the cost of the suit from the defendants and their assets.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
No order as to costs in OS.1626/2012.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale Deed No. 4225/08 establishes the ownership of 6 cents of property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Tax Receipt for the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No. 40/2010 shows transfer of southern three cents of property to the second plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Tax Receipt for the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Ownership Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Ownership certificate of the building bearing TC No. 30/986 comprised in plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Tax Receipt bearing TC No. 30/985 comprised in plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of rough sketch pertaining to the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Complaint receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original receipt of complaint filed by plaintiff before the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram regarding obstruction.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Complaint and Reports
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copies of complaints, reports, and proceedings of Secretary, including findings from the Corporation Squad.
Reference:
Ext.A9 Series
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report detailing the encroachment and construction by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Rough sketch marked by the advocate commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Complaint
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of complaint dated 13/07/2012 filed before the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type: Reminder for Complaint
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of Reminder for the complaint filed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Document Type: Squad Report
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Squad Report dated 17/07/2012 relevant to the obstruction complaint.
Reference:
Ext.X3
Document Type: Memo from Corporation
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Memo from the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram regarding the complaint.
Reference:
Ext.X4
Document Type: Order from Corporation
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of the order from the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram related to the unauthorized construction.
Reference:
Ext.X5
Document Type: Authorization letter
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Original Authorization Letter from the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation for PW2 to adduce evidence.
Reference:
Ext.X6

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Aloysius E.Gomez et al vs Maglin Lobo regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Aloysius E.Gomez et al vs Maglin Lobo regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 03/29/2012 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Dayanandan vs Anila Kumari et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Shaji P.R vs Rajani regarding removal of encroachment and restoration of pathway
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Divya Kumar.P vs Peethambaran et al regarding recovery of possession and mesne profits.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Syed Mohammed Sadik vs Suresh Babu. R.C regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and consequential reliefs.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Thulaseedharan.B. vs Bindu et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction
Court of Additional Munsiff (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won