Case Summary
Babu. P filed a suit against Vinod Kumar. P and others for a permanent prohibitory injunction regarding temple rituals and construction activities. The plaintiff claims that the defendants are obstructing his rights as the managing trustee of the temple trust.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants and their men are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff from entering the plaint schedule property and performing rituals.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiff from entering the plaint schedule property and performing rituals. The defendants are also restrained from constructing the temple.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The uncontroverted evidence of the plaintiff and the documents produced are sufficient to grant the decree.
The uncontroverted evidence of the plaintiff and the documents produced are sufficient to grant the decree.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The uncontroverted evidence of the plaintiff and the documents produced are sufficient to grant the decree.
The uncontroverted evidence of the plaintiff and the documents produced are sufficient to grant the decree.
Supporting Evidence
It is evident from the affidavit that the defendants are trying to obstruct the plaintiff from entering the temple and performing the poojas and other rituals and supervising the construction of the temple.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1The defendants and their men are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff from entering into the plaint schedule property. 2The defendants and their men are further restrained from construction of the temple.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Babu. P
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vinod Kumar. P
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mahesh. P
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aneesh. P
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Manikandan
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chekkutty. P
- Party Age
- 80
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of trust deed No: 217/2021, Certified copy of Settlement deed No: 1746/2021, Copy of Lawyer notice, Postal receipts
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. E.K. Santhosh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P.K. Siddharthan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Nikhila. K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from obstructing the plaintiff from entering the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff from entering into the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from construction of the temple and involving in the activities of the trust.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are further restrained from construction of the temple and involving into the activities of the Puthalath Koodathingal Bhagavathy Kshetra Trust.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from performing poojas and other rituals in the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are further restrained from performing poojas and other rituals in the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Costs of the suit to be paid by the defendants.
Evidence:
The defendants shall pay the costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Trust Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the trust deed of the temple bearing No.217/2021, establishing the plaintiff as the founder trustee.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the settlement deed No.1746/2021 of SRO, Chalappuram, related to the registration of the plaint schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of lawyer notice issued by the plaintiff regarding the defendants' activities against the trust.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of complaint filed before SHO Pantheerankavu Police Station regarding the defendants' obstruction.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Court commission report submitted for the suit.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan associated with the court commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Photo
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Photos related to the court commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Obstructing worship and rituals
Case Code
Case between Babu. P vs Vinod Kumar. P et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Babu. P vs Vinod Kumar. P et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction