Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No.513/2025

Case between Nisa Salim vs Shinoj Abraham et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt. Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-07-17
Duration
approximately-2 years 4 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Nisa Salim, through her power of attorney, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against defendants Shinoj Abraham and Danny Shinoj, claiming obstruction to her property access. The case revolves around the possession and rights to specified properties in Pattom village.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court directed both parties to maintain status quo regarding the disputed properties as per the commission report until the suit is finally disposed of.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court directed both parties to maintain status quo regarding the disputed properties as per the commission report until the suit is finally disposed of.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that it was necessary to maintain the status quo to ensure justice and preservation of the property involved in the case.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Considering the nature of dispute and the documents produced, I am of the opinion that it is necessary in the interest of justice to pass a status quo as per Ext.C1 report in the interest of justice and to ensure preservation of the plaint schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result this application is disposed by directing the parties to maintain status quo as per Ext.C1 report till the final disposal of the suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Nisa Salim
Party Age
51
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mathew Varghese
Party Age
54
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Shinoj Abraham
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Danny Shinoj
Party Age
20
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified Copy of Sale deed No.2240/24, Tax receipt, Original Power of Attorney
Defendants Documents
Original Partition deed No. 2245/2003, The Plan issued by Village Office, Pattom, Tax Receipt, Order of Tahasildar, Thiruvananthapuram, Copy of Possession Certificate

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Kamaleswaram.S.Manikantan Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Vaishakh.M.S
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.S.Dharmapalan Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Parvathy.J.Nair
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Raju George
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The petitioner's request for a permanent prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with possession.
Evidence:
The petitioner apprehends that defendants might interfere with the right of petitioner over plaint A and C schedule properties.
Relief Type: Temporary Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petitioner sought temporary injunction to maintain status quo regarding the properties.
Evidence:
Considering the nature of dispute and the documents produced, I am of the opinion that it is necessary in the interest of justice to pass a status quo as per Ext.C1 report.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Sale deed No.2240/2024, establishing the petitioner's claim to the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Tax receipt pertaining to plaint A schedule property, supporting the petitioner's ownership claim.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Power of Attorney, indicating the authority of the petitioner to act on behalf of the original plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Original partition deed No.2245/2003, outlining the distribution of property rights among the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Plan
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The plan issued by the Village Office, Pattom, relevant to the property disputes.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Tax receipt supporting the defendants' claims regarding property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Order
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Order of Tahasildar, Thiruvananthapuram, relevant to the claims made by the parties.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Possession Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of Possession Certificate establishing the defendant's claim to the property.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report detailing the status of the properties in dispute and their access pathways.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Nisa Salim vs Shinoj Abraham et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Nisa Salim vs Shinoj Abraham et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 03/09/2023 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
70%

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