Case Summary
Arifa Beevi filed a suit against Syamala for a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent her from trespassing on certain property. The plaintiff claims ownership through her husband, who is currently abroad.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted
Case Type
Original Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from trespassing the plaint schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff is in possession of the plaint schedule property which is owned by her husband.
The plaintiff is in possession of the plaint schedule property which is owned by her husband.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Through the unchallenged oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff, it is crystal clear that plaintiff is in possession of the plaint schedule property which is owned by her husband.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant is restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and committing any act which will affect the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Arifa Beevi
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Syamala
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 560/2002 of Kavalayoor SRO
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. A.S. Naushad
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. S. V. Shinu
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C. Vijayakumar
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff restraining the defendant from trespassing into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff and the defendant is restrained from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and committing any act which will affect the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 560/2002 of Kavalayoor S.R.O. which establishes the plaintiff's claim to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Case Classification
Case Type
Original Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Arifa Beevi vs Syamala regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Arifa Beevi vs Syamala regarding permanent prohibitory injunction