Case Summary
The plaintiffs, a husband and wife, sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants who were encroaching on a lane they used for access. The defendants, who are relatives of a deceased purported owner, were attempting to construct a wall on the plaintiffs' access way.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit for an injunction as the plaintiffs failed to establish their right to the use of the way against the encroachment by the defendants. The plaintiffs were found not to have acted in good faith regarding the delays in filing.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs could not prove all necessary elements to obtain a permanent injunction.
The plaintiffs could not prove all necessary elements to obtain a permanent injunction.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs could not prove all necessary elements to obtain a permanent injunction.
The plaintiffs could not prove all necessary elements to obtain a permanent injunction.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs failed to prove all the necessary elements required to obtain an injunction in their favor.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result: The suit is dismissed. No costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- B. Sreekala
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sanilkumar M.S
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Reji. K
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Raji. K
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rosili Mariam
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Soman.D
- Party Age
- 73
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 4573/2006, Original Land tax receipt No. 0615517, Original building Tax receipt No. 11/120070103013, Photograph
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Hari. S. Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Subha.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants regarding encroachment.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs have failed to prove all the necessary elements required to obtain an injunction in their favor.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Sale Deed No. 4573/2006 establishing the plaintiffs' ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Land tax receipt No. 0615517 evidencing tax payment related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Building Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original building tax receipt No. 11/120070103013 showing payment of property tax for the building.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Photograph
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photograph of the plaint schedule way used to support the plaintiffs' claim regarding encroachment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court exhibit prepared by an advocate commissioner regarding the site visit without signs of encroachment.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2020