Case Summary
The plaintiff Raghuveer has sued for a mandatory and prohibitory injunction concerning the use of a property pathway, which he claims is essential for accessing his owned properties. The defendants include a temple and its management board, which assert that the plaintiff has no legal right over the disputed pathway.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff regarding the right of way over the disputed property, ruling that the plaintiff has no legal right in this matter.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish a legal right of way over the path in question.
The plaintiff failed to establish a legal right of way over the path in question.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to establish a legal right of way over the path in question.
The plaintiff failed to establish a legal right of way over the path in question.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has not succeeded in establishing his right of way over plaint B schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Raghuveer
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sree Vettakkorumakan Kshethram
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- A. Dinesh Kumar
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thamarassery Gopakumar
- Party Age
- 54
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Malabar Devaswam Board
Plaintiffs Documents
Janmam Assignment deed No.1142/2006, Janmam Assignment deed No.3012/2008, Agreement dated 14.11.2006, Basic Tax Receipts, Certified copy of Charthadharam No.1566/1953.
Defendants Documents
Copy of Judgment in OS. 693/1939, Notice issued by Additional Thahsildar, Possession Certificate, Basic Tax Receipt, Copy of relevant page field measurement book.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.P. Gangadharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sandeep Krishnan
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- T. Shibu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M. Jayadeep
- Appearance Type
- Government Pleader
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction to remove obstructions on plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
In the said circumstances, he has no right to seek a relief of mandatory injunction.
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought a perpetual injunction regarding the use of plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
Therefore this court finds that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree for perpetual injunction as well.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Janmam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document establishing plaintiff's ownership over item No. 1 of plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Janmam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document establishing plaintiff's ownership over item No. 2 of plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Agreement granting plaintiff permission to use plaint B schedule property as a vehicular access.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt proving tax payment related to plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt proving tax payment related to plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Certified copy of Charthadharam
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document proving historical transfer of rights related to plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certificate proving plaintiff's possession over plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Copy of judgment
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Judgment establishing ownership of contested pathway related to plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certificate showing the possession of plaint B schedule property by the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Receipt proving tax payment related to plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report submitted by the commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan submitted by the commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report submitted by the commissioner regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Surveyor’s plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Plan submitted by the surveyor regarding the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Right of way obstruction
Case Code
Case between Raghuveer vs Sree Vettakkorumakan Kshethram et al regarding mandatory injunction and for permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Raghuveer vs Sree Vettakkorumakan Kshethram et al regarding mandatory injunction and for permanent prohibitory injunction.