Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 658/2018

Case between Angadi Veettil Padmini vs Angadi Veettil Vasudevan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF-II, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Smt. Savitha T.P
Order Date
2025-11-21
Duration
approximately-7 years 2 months
Case Closed
Fri, 11/21/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Angadi Veettil Padmini, is seeking to restrain the defendants from obstructing a pathway to her property. The defendants are relatives of the plaintiff, and the case revolves around the ownership and use of the pathway.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court restrained the defendants from demolishing and obstructing the pathway to the plaintiff's property. The plaintiff is also entitled to costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants are restrained from demolishing the plaint D schedule pathway and are ordered to allow access to the plaintiff.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court restrained the defendants from demolishing and obstructing the pathway to the plaintiff's property. The plaintiff is also entitled to costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and rights over the pathway was unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff regarding ownership and rights over the pathway was unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence put forth by the plaintiff remains unchallenged. Therefore I find that the defendants shall be restrained from demolishing the plaint D schedule pathway.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, Defendants are restrained from demolishing the plaint D schedule, two wheeler motorable pathway to the plaint schedule and from obstructing the plaintiff from using the plaint D schedule pathway in width 1.2 m, length 43 m as per Ext.C2(a) plan for ingress and egress to the plaint A schedule.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Angadi Veettil Padmini
Party Age
60
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Angadi Veettil Vasudevan
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rajani
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Soorajlal
Party Age
24
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Angadi Veettil Pradeep
Party Age
45
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of Document No. 18 of 1965 of Feroke SRO, Certified copy of Deed No. 108/1989 of SRO, Feroke, Land Tax Receipt, Plan and Permit issued by Grama Panchayath, Kadalundi.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Unnikrishnan Puthalath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Shaji. M.V
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
N.K. Viswanathan
Appearance Type
Case between Angadi Veettil Padmini vs Angadi Veettil Vasudevan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction. > Case advocates

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants restrained from demolishing plaint D schedule pathway and obstructing plaintiff's access.
Evidence:
Therefore I find that the defendants shall be restrained from demolishing the plaint D schedule, two wheeler motorable pathway and from obstructing the plaintiffs from using the plaint D schedule pathway for ingress and egress to the plaint A schedule.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff entitled to costs of the suit.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to get the costs also.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Photocopy of Document No. 18 of 1965 of Feroke SRO
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows ownership of plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Certified copy of Deed No. 108/1989 of SRO, Feroke
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms acquisition of plaint A schedule property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates payment of land tax for plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Plan and Permit issued by Grama Panchayath, Kadalundi
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supports the legitimacy of the construction on plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Reports on the absence of alternative pathways to plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Sketch filed along with Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Illustrates the pathway to plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Further verifies the existing pathway to plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Sketch filed along with Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Depicts the dimensions of the pathway to plaint A schedule.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Right of way obstruction
Case Code
Case between Angadi Veettil Padmini vs Angadi Veettil Vasudevan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Angadi Veettil Padmini vs Angadi Veettil Vasudevan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Sun, 09/09/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 11/21/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Muhammed Rasikh.T.P vs Abdul Razak @ Bichu et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Rosemary vs George regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Additional Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Perikkathra Surendran vs Palakurumba Gangadharan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Abdul Manzoor.P.P vs Edathil Balan et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Shiji.M vs Hassan Haji et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction.
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Defendant Won