Case Summary
Ibrahim is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against Balakrishnan and his children who are obstructing access to his property. The case revolves around the usage of a 4-foot pathway that Ibrahim claims is the only access to his property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendants and their men are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the usage of plaint B schedule property by the plaintiff.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants from obstructing the usage of the pathway.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiff successfully demonstrated that the pathway is the only access to their property and that the defendants failed to prove their claim over it.
Plaintiff successfully demonstrated that the pathway is the only access to their property and that the defendants failed to prove their claim over it.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Plaintiff successfully demonstrated that the pathway is the only access to their property and that the defendants failed to prove their claim over it.
Plaintiff successfully demonstrated that the pathway is the only access to their property and that the defendants failed to prove their claim over it.
Supporting Evidence
The learned counsel for the plaintiff argued that, based on the evidence and the Commissioner's report, the pathway is a public way that has been obstructed by the defendants.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: Defendants and their men are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the usage of plaint B schedule property by the plaintiff.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ibrahim
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Balakrishnan
- Party Age
- 67
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jithesh
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Lijesh
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shalu
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Kanam assignment deed No. 2170/1978, Possession certificate issued by Village Officer, Copy of land Tax receipt issued by Village Officer.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Razal Rahiman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Youseph M
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from obstructing the usage of plaint B schedule property by the plaintiff.
Evidence:
The defendants and their men are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from obstructing the usage of plaint B schedule property by the plaintiff.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Kanam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This certificate verifies the plaintiff's possession of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt proves the plaintiff's payment of land tax for the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report indicates that plaint B schedule property is the only access to plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1 Series
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Easement by necessity
Case Code
Case between Ibrahim vs Balakrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Ibrahim vs Balakrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction