Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.658/2019

Case between Shaji P.R vs Rajani regarding removal of encroachment and restoration of pathway

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-08-27
Duration
approximately-6 years 5 months
Case Code No.
658
Case Closed
Wed, 08/27/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Shaji P.R filed a suit against his sister Rajani for the removal of an encroachment and restoration of a pathway that provides access to his property. The defendant allegedly constructed a wall blocking the pathway, which the plaintiff claims has caused him hardship.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit filed by Shaji P.R was dismissed as he failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate his claims regarding the existence of the pathway and his right to access. The court ruled that the plaintiff did not adequately prove his case.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit filed by Shaji P.R was dismissed as he failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate his claims regarding the existence of the pathway and his right to access. The court ruled that the plaintiff did not adequately prove his case.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to prove the existence and legal right of access through the pathway.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to prove the existence and legal right of access through the pathway.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has failed to discharge the burden of proving the essential ingredients to get a decree in his favour.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result; the suit is dismissed. No costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shaji P.R
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rajani
Party Age
60
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Sale deed No. 2410/1973, Original settlement deed 5612/1995, Original tax receipt
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. K. Gopakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought removal of the constructed wall and restoration of access to the pathway.
Evidence:
In the light of discussions in the forgoing point, this court is of the view that the plaintiff is not entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Sale Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves ownership of the plaint 'A' schedule property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Original settlement deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates the transfer of half share of the property to the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Original tax receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicates the plaintiff is current on land tax payments for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2019

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Mon, 03/25/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Wed, 08/27/2025 - 12:00
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Shibu et al vs Bindhu et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and other consequential reliefs.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Dayanandan vs Anila Kumari et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Divya Kumar.P vs Peethambaran et al regarding recovery of possession and mesne profits.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Syed Mohammed Sadik vs Suresh Babu. R.C regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and consequential reliefs.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Thulaseedharan.B. vs Bindu et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction
Court of Additional Munsiff (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won