Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 229 / 2020

Case between Narmadha et al vs Marakkath Lal regarding permanent injunction

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Sri. Vivek P.
Order Date
2025-03-29
Duration
approximately-4 years 8 months 20 days
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Narmadha and others, claim ownership and possession of a property originally held under a partition deed. They seek an injunction against the defendant, Marakkath Lal, who is the legal heir of the previous owner, to prevent trespassing into the property.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their case for a permanent injunction as they did not identify the property properly. Thus, the suit was dismissed without costs.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their case for a permanent injunction as they did not identify the property properly. Thus, the suit was dismissed without costs.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to identify the plaint B schedule property adequately.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs failed to identify the plaint B schedule property adequately.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs failed to identify plaint B schedule property on the basis of its description in the plaint.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed without costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Narmadha
Party Age
83
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sindhu
Party Age
52
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sanjitha
Party Age
50
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sooraj
Party Age
46
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Marakkath Lal
Party Age
56
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Registration copy of partition deed No.1330/1981, Copy of land tax receipt dated 03.07.2020, Copy of complaint filed by Sooraj before SHO Nadakkavu on 05.07.2020.
Defendants Documents
Electricity demand and disconnection notice issued by Electricity Board in the name of Kesavan, Property receipts issued by Kozhikode Municipal Corporation in the name of Kesavan.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.K.B.Sivarama Krishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Akshay Kammath
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.K.B.Sahasranaman
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Muhammed Hussain.K
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs requested a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint B scheduled property.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are not entitled for a discretionary relief of permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiffs' ownership and possession of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows that the plaintiffs have remitted tax for the said properties.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Complaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document details the police complaint filed by the plaintiffs against the defendant regarding trespassing.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Electricity Demand Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document is related to the electricity services in the name of Kesavan, clarifying his association with the property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Property Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows the property receipt issued in the name of Kesavan from the municipal corporation.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Property Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows another property receipt issued in the name of Kesavan.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Property Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows a recent property receipt issued in the name of Kesavan.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Cash Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows a cash receipt issued in the name of Kesavan.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Cash Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows another cash receipt issued in the name of Kesavan.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Cash Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows a recent cash receipt issued in the name of Kesavan.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Property Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document shows a property receipt related to Madhavi M issued by the municipal corporation.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This report offers insights into the identification and boundaries of the disputed property.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Narmadha et al vs Marakkath Lal regarding permanent injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Narmadha et al vs Marakkath Lal regarding permanent injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode District
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Thu, 07/09/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Saifudheen Ibrahim et al vs K.S.Madhusoodanan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between V.M. Abdulkhader Muhammed vs Calicut North Service Co-Operative Bank regarding mandatory and prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Malayil Balan vs Nikhil regarding injunction restraining trespass
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Bineesh vs Thekkedath Sreenivasan Nair et al regarding declaration of right and injunction.
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between P.Premi et al vs M.Rijeesh et al regarding recovery of possession and consequential injunction.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE.
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won