Case Summary
Nisamudeen is the plaintiff seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction and a mandatory injunction against the defendants Reena, Khalid, and Nahas. The case involves a dispute over property rights and attempts by the defendants to encroach upon the plaint schedule property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A permanent prohibitory injunction and a mandatory injunction to restore the demolished portion of the compound wall.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiff and ordered the defendants to restore the destroyed portion of the compound wall. The counterclaim by the first defendant was dismissed.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The defendants attempted to trespass and encroach upon the plaint schedule property, which justified the injunction.
The defendants attempted to trespass and encroach upon the plaint schedule property, which justified the injunction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The defendants attempted to trespass and encroach upon the plaint schedule property, which justified the injunction.
The defendants attempted to trespass and encroach upon the plaint schedule property, which justified the injunction.
Supporting Evidence
It is true that in Ext.C2(a), the pathway to the counterclaim schedule property is shown as plot 'DGFH'. As per Ext.C2 and C2(a), the entire counterclaim schedule property 20 cents is shown as plot 'ABEFHDGA'.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff and defendants 1, 2 and 4 are restrained from encroaching into the plaint schedule property and cutting open a new pathway through the plaint schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nisamudeen
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Reena
- Party Age
- 31
- Relation
- D/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Khalid
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Riyas
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nahas
- Party Age
- 25
- Relation
- S/o.
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Power of Attorney, Certified copy of Sale deed No. 1187/2013 of S.R.O., Varkala.
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 5755/2010 of S.R.O., Varkala.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C. Shibu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. S. Krishnakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restraining the defendants from encroaching into the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiff and defendants 1, 2 and 4 are restrained from encroaching into the plaint schedule property.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Directing defendants to reinstate the demolished portion of the compound wall.
Evidence:
Defendants 1, 2 and 4 are directed to reinstate the demolished portion of the compound wall on the north-western corner of plaint schedule property within thirty days from the date of this decree.
Relief Type:
Counterclaim Dismissal
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Court dismisses the counterclaim filed by the first defendant.
Evidence:
The counterclaim is hereby dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the plaintiff's representation in the suit.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as proof of tax payment for the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the settlement concerning the property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicates the transfer of ownership that led to the current dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Resurvey Sketch
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides a visual representation of the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Shows the defendant's claim over the counterclaim schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Acts as evidence of tax payment associated with the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Details findings of the commissioner regarding the property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Rough Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Visual aids related to the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Chronicles the second commission's findings on the property access.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Provides a structured representation of the surveyed property area.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Nisamudeen vs Reena et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Nisamudeen vs Reena et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction