Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 501/2017

Case between Prasobhana et al vs Shanavas et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Judge
Sri. ARAVIND P.
Order Date
2025-02-28
Duration
approximately-7 years 8 months 22 days
Case Closed
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, comprising members of the family of Late Suresh Babu, filed a suit against the defendants for a permanent prohibitory injunction to prevent interference in their property. The plaintiffs sought legal redress against the defendants who were obstructing the construction of a compound wall around their property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and obstructing the plaintiffs' construction of a compound wall. Costs were not awarded to either party.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favor of the plaintiffs.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property and obstructing the plaintiffs' construction of a compound wall. Costs were not awarded to either party.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established their case through unchallenged oral and documentary evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Through the unchallenged oral and documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiffs have established their case.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. A permanent prohibitory injunction is granted in favour of the plaintiffs and the defendants are restrained from trespassing into plaint schedule property and cutting open a pathway through the plaint schedule property.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Prasobhana
Party Age
54
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shiji
Party Age
31
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shinu
Party Age
26
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shiju
Party Age
25
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Shanavas
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Prathap
Party Age
66
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Baiju
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Archana Das
Party Age
36
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sheela
Party Age
55
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Sale deed No. 1249/1989 of SRO, Kadakkavoor, Certified copy of Will deed No. 44/2002 of SRO, Kadakkavoor, Tax receipt No. 1266856 of Anjuthengu Village Office.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. N. Smart
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. S.V. Shinu
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
A decree of permanent prohibitory injunction was granted in favor of the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants are restrained from obstructing the construction of boundary wall by the plaintiffs.
Evidence:
The defendants are further restrained from obstructing the construction of boundary wall by the plaintiffs in the plaint schedule property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiffs' right to the property as it shows the purchase by Mr. Suresh Babu.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Will Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates that the property was bequeathed to the plaintiffs, confirming their ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This document provides a factual basis for the court's findings regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Rough Sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This document visually supports the commission report related to the plaint schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This document further substantiates the court's decision through additional findings.
Reference:
Ext.C2

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Prasobhana et al vs Shanavas et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Prasobhana et al vs Shanavas et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Varkala
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Case Filed
Thu, 06/22/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Sunitha vs Shibu Purushothaman regarding temporary injunction.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between The Federal Bank, Ltd vs Siyad. S, Haseena Beevi regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Margaret Solomon Cruz et al vs Mabel James et al regarding declaration of title and injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Babu Rajan N. et al vs The Government Of Kerala regarding declaration of civil death
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sheena vs Anvar et al regarding temporary injunction against illegal business.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won