Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.864/2025

Case between Jithesh.S.V. vs Aditya Manjeet Raghavan regarding temporary prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Judge
Smt. Salini.B.
Order Date
2025-11-13
Duration
approximately-6 months
Case Code No.
864
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Jithesh.S.V. and Sharanya Stanley, the petitioners, filed for a temporary prohibitory injunction against Aditya Manjeet Raghavan and Anju Raveendran, the counter petitioners. The case involves a dispute over boundary issues and construction on adjacent properties.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court vacated the temporary prohibitory injunction allowing the counter petitioners to proceed with their construction while ensuring that they adhere to the boundary measurements.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court vacated the temporary prohibitory injunction allowing the counter petitioners to proceed with their construction while ensuring that they adhere to the boundary measurements.
Key Reasoning:
The counter petitioners demonstrated that their construction was in accordance with the approved plans and did not encroach upon the petitioners' property.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It is revealed that the ground floor of the building constructing in the petition B scheduled property is almost completed and until now they have not made any constructions encroaching into the petition A schedule property. The counter petitioners kept the necessary setbacks (open space) required as per the Building Rules from the northern boundary of the petition A schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the ad interim injunction already granted in IA. 1/2025 dated 29.04.2025 is hereby vacated on the condition that the counter petitioners shall only make constructions in the petition B schedule property as per permit granted and plan approved by the authority concerned.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Jithesh.S.V.
Party Age
42
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sharanya Stanley
Party Age
32
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Aditya Manjeet Raghavan
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Anju Raveendran
Party Age
37
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of sale deed No.1620/2022, Copy of tax receipt dated 25.04.2025, Certified copy of sale deed No.3005/2022, Certified copy of sale deed No.1856/2010, Certified copy of sale deed No.1855/2010
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Thonnakkal G.Rajeev
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Padmini.N
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain counter petitioners from further construction pending boundary determination.
Evidence:
The injunction already granted is liable to be vacated as more irreparable injury and hardship will be caused to the counter petitioners compared to the petitioners.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.1620/2022 dated 23.06.2022 establishing ownership of the petition A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of tax receipt dated 25.04.2025 relevant for establishing ownership and taxes paid for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.3005/2022 dated 28.12.2022 related to the counter petitioners' property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.1856/2010 relevant for prior ownership details.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed No.1855/2010 relevant for prior ownership details.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report and rough plan dated 12.05.2025 used to assess the property boundary.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report and plan dated 27.09.2025 further evaluating property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C2

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
2025

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sat, 11/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 11/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won