Case Summary
Asokan, the plaintiff, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Jaya Babu and Ramesan K K, who are allegedly encroaching upon his property. The plaintiff asserts his right to the property based on previous ownership and seeks relief from interference by the defendants.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court has granted the plaintiff's request for a permanent prohibitory injunction, prohibiting the defendants from trespassing on the plaint schedule property and interfering with the plaintiff's possession. The court acknowledged the plaintiff's possession of the property despite questions regarding title.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved his possession over the property beyond doubt.
The plaintiff proved his possession over the property beyond doubt.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved his possession over the property beyond doubt.
The plaintiff proved his possession over the property beyond doubt.
Supporting Evidence
It can be seen that the plaintiff is having right over the property, even though the application for patta was dismissed. The ownership and title over the property can be ascertained...
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows. Defendants and their men or agent or anybody claiming under them are hereby restrained from trespassing into the plaint A schedule property...
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Asokan
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jaya Babu
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ramesan K K
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Biju P S
- Party Age
- 35
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Decree in OS No 1198/1986, Tax Receipt, Photocopy of the report prepared by the Village Officer, Photocopy of the sketch prepared by the Village Officer, Certified copy of Judgment in OS No 1198/1986, Commission Report and plan submitted by the Advocate Commissioner in OS No 40/2014.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Order in SM No 384/2017 of Land Tribunal, Ernakulam.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K M Vivekanandan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Abhilash Augustine
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff requested to restrain defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and causing disruption.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is in possession of the property situated within the boundaries described in the plaint schedule.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certified copy of decree
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document showing the compromise decree and property allotment to the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document evidencing the plaintiff's tax payment for the schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Photocopy of the report
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document prepared by the Village Officer confirming the location and boundaries of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document providing judicial authority for the plaintiff's claim through the prior suit.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission report and plan
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document detailing the findings of the Advocate Commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Certified copy of Order
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document issued by the Land Tribunal dismissing the plaintiff’s application for Patta pertaining to the scheduled property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report confirming the boundaries and the condition of the plaint schedule property prepared by the Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch supporting the Advocate Commissioner's report related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Asokan vs Jaya Babu, Ramesan K K et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Asokan vs Jaya Babu, Ramesan K K et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction