Case between Sasidharan.D vs Vijayalekshmi.P et al regarding injunction and property rights

Case Summary

Sasidharan.D, the petitioner, is seeking an injunction against his siblings, Vijayalekshmi.P and others, who are allegedly attempting to trespass on his property. The case revolves around ownership and possession issues related to a partition deed and the rights to the pathway connecting their properties.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won

Interim Order

The court modified the ad interim injunction, restraining the counter petitioners from trespassing onto the petition A schedule property or demolishing any part of the building therein until the final disposal of the suit.

Judgment Favored

Plaintiff

Relief Granted

Modified ad interim injunction

Case Type

Injunction

Final Judgment

No

The court modified the ad interim injunction, restraining the counter petitioners from trespassing onto the petition A schedule property or demolishing any part of the building therein until the final disposal of the suit.

Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established a prima facie case proving ownership and apprehension of trespass.

Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available

Supporting Evidence

On considering the rival contentions, I am of the view that being the owner and in possession of the petition A schedule property and portion of building therein, and apprehends trespass and demolition of building therein, he has proved a prima facie case in his favour.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the ad interim injunction already ordered in IA.1/2024 dated 26.10.2024 is hereby modified as follows: The counter petitioners 1 to 4 are restrained from trespassing into petition A schedule property or from demolishing or destructing the portion of building situated in petition A schedule property or from widening the petition E schedule way until final disposal of the suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Sasidharan.D
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Vijayalekshmi.P
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Susheela.P
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Thulasi.D
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Muhammed Musthafa Niyas
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri.Deepak Twinkle Sanal
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. Girish Kumar.V.S
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. Abhilash.D
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. M.R. Anandakuttan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. Anand.R
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction

Outcome: Partly Granted

Description:

Modification of the ad interim injunction to prevent counter petitioners from trespassing or demolishing the property.

Evidence:

The ad interim injunction already ordered in IA.1/2024 dated 26.10.2024 is hereby modified as follows: The counter petitioners 1 to 4 are restrained from trespassing into petition A schedule property or from demolishing or destructing the portion of building situated in petition A schedule property or from widening the petition E schedule way until final disposal of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

This document establishes the ownership and possession of properties A to D by the petitioner and counter petitioners.

Reference:

No.487/2010

Document Type: Ad Interim Order

Submitted By: Court

Relevance:

This order's modification and its implications regarding the injunction were central to the court's decision.