Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No.1511/2019

Case between Shyam Manohari V.S vs Geetha O regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Judge
Sri. Manesh.S.V
Order Date
2025-12-20
Duration
approximately-6 years 4 months
Case Closed
Sat, 12/20/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Shyam Manohari V.S, a widow and owner of a property, is involved in a legal dispute with her neighbor Geetha O, who is accused of making illegal constructions that violate building rules. Shyam seeks a permanent injunction against these constructions.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to refrain from further constructions and mandating the removal of an illegally constructed metallic staircase.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendant is restrained from making any further constructions in the plaint B and C schedule property and is directed to remove the plaint C schedule metallic staircase within one month.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to refrain from further constructions and mandating the removal of an illegally constructed metallic staircase.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff provided credible evidence of illegal constructions by the defendant, which violated building regulations.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff provided credible evidence of illegal constructions by the defendant, which violated building regulations.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence adduced by the plaintiff convinces the Court that mandatory injunction is justified due to clear violations of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit decreed is with costs as follows: 1. The defendant or her agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from making any further constructions in the plaint B and C schedule property in violation of the mandatory provisions of prevailing Kerala Municipality Building Rules or without obtaining requisite permissions from the relevant Local self government institution or from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint A schedule property.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shyam Manohari V.S
Party Age
54
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Geetha O
Party Age
45
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
27.04.2019 Property Tax receipt, 30.04.2018 Copy of stop memo, Photograph and CD
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Ravikrishnan N.R
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.Deepu U.V
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought to restrain the defendant from further constructions in plaint B and C schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendant or her agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from making any further constructions in the plaint B and C schedule property in violation of the mandatory provisions of prevailing Kerala Municipality Building Rules.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff requested removal of the defendant's metallic staircase.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed by a decree of mandatory injunction to remove the plaint C schedule metallic staircase within one month from the date of decree.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Property Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the plaintiff's ownership and possession of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of stop memo
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demonstrates the plaintiff's prior complaints regarding unauthorized construction by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Photograph and CD
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as visual evidence of the construction in question and its proximity to the plaintiff's property.
Reference:
Ext.A3 series
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provides a report on the construction violations as noted by the Advocate Commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Shyam Manohari V.S vs Geetha O regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Shyam Manohari V.S vs Geetha O regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Wed, 08/21/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 12/20/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 12/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Reghuthaman Nair vs Sindhu.K.V. et al regarding injunction
THE ADDL. MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between K.P.Sanilkumar vs Kerala State et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/S EDS Structures Private Limited vs M/s Excalibur Group Private Ltd regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction
Court of Additional Munsiff-RCC
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between C.S.Sudhan vs Abraham Paul et al regarding injunction.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between K. Prathap kumar et al vs Sheela regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won