Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 354/2022

Case between Sidharthan VP vs KP Manoj regarding mandatory injunction and damages

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Smt.Meera John K.
Order Date
2025-08-26
Duration
approximately-3 years 6 months
Case Closed
Tue, 08/26/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Sidharthan VP, seeks a mandatory injunction and damages from the defendant, KP Manoj, for illegal use and occupation of shop rooms. The case involves a dispute over possession of property and the nature of the relationship as licensee or tenant.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed with the defendant directed to surrender vacant possession of the plaint schedule property and to pay damages of ₹6,000 per month for unlawful occupation.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is directed to surrender vacant possession and pay damages of ₹6,000 per month.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed with the defendant directed to surrender vacant possession of the plaint schedule property and to pay damages of ₹6,000 per month for unlawful occupation.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully established the nature of the defendant's occupation as unlawful and sought possession through an appropriate legal remedy.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff successfully established the nature of the defendant's occupation as unlawful and sought possession through an appropriate legal remedy.
Supporting Evidence
The conditions enumerated in Exhibit A7 agreement would show that the defendant was only given a permission to use the petition schedule shop rooms and he was not given the possession of the same.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The defendant is directed by way of mandatory injunction to surrender vacant possession of plaint schedule property by removing the belongings within a period of one month from today failing which the plaintiff is entitled to execute the same through the process of law known to him.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sidharthan VP
Party Age
67
Relation
S/o. Late.Pachukutty
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
KP Manoj
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o.Kandamparambath Sukumaran
Plaintiffs Documents
Settlement deed No. 1866/90, License agreement dated 02.05.2019, Copy of lawyer notice sent by Adv. Jayadeep M to KP Manoj
Defendants Documents
Certified copy of plaint in OS 278/21, Certified copy of reply of notice issued by Adv.K Pradeepan

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Jayadeep M
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.K Pradeepan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Direction to the defendant to surrender vacant possession of the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed by way of mandatory injunction to surrender vacant possession of plaint schedule property by removing the belongings within a period of one month from today.
Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Partly Granted
Description:
Payment of damages for illegal use and occupation of the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed to pay 6,000/- per month as damages for illegal use and occupation of the plaint schedule property from August 2021 till he vacates from the plaint schedule property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: License Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the terms under which the defendant occupied the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notifies the defendant to vacate the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: License Agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The defendant claims this document shows the landlord-tenant relationship.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Plaint Copy
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Supporting the defendant's claims in a counter-suit.
Reference:
Ext.B10

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Unauthorized occupation
Case Code
Case between Sidharthan VP vs KP Manoj regarding mandatory injunction and damages
Case Code Year
Case between Sidharthan VP vs KP Manoj regarding mandatory injunction and damages

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Wed, 02/02/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 08/26/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Shahabeese P.V. vs Shijin Kumar K.C. regarding mandatory injunction and for realization of arrears of license fee and damages
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between T.Sunitha, T Sushama, T Sushitha vs M.Raveendranath regarding recovery of possession and damages.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kasthurba Mahila Samajam vs Dhanyasree K. regarding mandatory injunction
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kasthurba Mahila Samajam vs Dhanyasree K. regarding mandatory injunction
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sangeetha Puthiyedath vs Janardhanan @ Mani regarding mandatory injunction and damages for illegal use and occupation
IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won