Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1196/2007

Case between Joseph Ben et al vs Lissy Fernanndez regarding declaration, recovery of possession and putting up of boundary.

Court
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-07-07
Duration
approximately-17 years 6 days
Case Closed
Mon, 07/07/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This case involves plaintiffs Joseph Ben and Johnson Ben seeking a declaration of ownership and recovery of possession of land encroached by defendant Lissy Fernanndez. The plaintiffs claim title over the property and seek to demolish unlawful constructions made by the defendant.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, declaring that the portion of the land claimed as plaint B schedule property is part of the plaint A schedule property. The plaintiffs are entitled to recover possession of this land and demolish any unlawful constructions by the defendant.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is allowed to recover the portion of plaint B schedule property from the defendant and to demolish the unlawful construction therein and to put up boundary in plaint A schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, declaring that the portion of the land claimed as plaint B schedule property is part of the plaint A schedule property. The plaintiffs are entitled to recover possession of this land and demolish any unlawful constructions by the defendant.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiffs was found credible and unchallenged.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiffs was found credible and unchallenged.
Supporting Evidence
From the available evidence, the plaintiff could establish his title and possession over plaint A schedule property inclusive of plaint B schedule property. The evidence of plaintiff remains unchallenged. There is no reason to disbelieve PW1.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows:- 1) It is declared that B schedule to the extent described in Ext.C1 and C1(a) is part of plaint A schedule property and plaintiff is allowed to recover the portion of plaint B schedule property from the defendant and to demolish the unlawful construction therein and to put up boundary in plaint A schedule property.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Joseph Ben
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Johnson Ben
Party Age
33
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Lissy Fernanndez
Party Age
35
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of settlement deed No.1322/1999 of Kazhakuttom SRO, Tax receipt dated 06/07/2007, Copy of judgment in OS.1504/2004 of the Additional Munsiff Court, Thiruvanthapuram.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. C.R. Sudheesh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Declaration that B schedule property is part of A schedule property.
Evidence:
It is declared that B schedule to the extent described in Ext.C1 and C1(a) is part of plaint A schedule property.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to recover the portion of plaint B schedule property from the defendant.
Evidence:
plaintiff is allowed to recover the portion of plaint B schedule property from the defendant.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Demolition of the unlawful construction in plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
to demolish the unlawful construction therein.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Putting up a boundary in plaint A schedule property.
Evidence:
to put up boundary in plaint A schedule property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as proof of ownership of the land in question.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt indicating payment related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Judgment Copy
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This judgment provides context to the previous ownership and recovery of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Decree
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Decree related to the recovery of the encroached property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Plan and Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the encroachment in the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Letter from Additional Tahasildar
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter indicating attempts to measure the properties.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another tax receipt relevant to the property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This report states the findings of the advocate commissioner regarding the encroachment.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This plan illustrates the property boundaries and the encroached area.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Joseph Ben et al vs Lissy Fernanndez regarding declaration, recovery of possession and putting up of boundary.
Case Code Year
Case between Joseph Ben et al vs Lissy Fernanndez regarding declaration, recovery of possession and putting up of boundary.

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Sat, 07/07/2007 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 07/07/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Sarathchandran Nair.J vs Government of India et al regarding boundary measurement and injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Nazarudeen. A vs Tom.D et al regarding suit for declaration, recovery of possession, and injunction
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Aravindan Nair et al vs Ramachandran Nair et al regarding partition and permanent prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Ramesan vs Sujatha et al regarding partition of ancestral property.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Biji.R vs Sheeja regarding specific performance
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won