Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 152/2020

Case between Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Judge
Smt. Shabeena M.
Order Date
2025-01-31
Duration
approximately-4 years 1 month
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Sujith K.M., is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika and P. Baburajan, to prevent them from trespassing into his property. The defendants are alleged to have attempted to construct a way through the plaintiff's land.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed by the court as it was found to be barred by the principles of res judicata due to previous judgments involving the same parties and issues.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed by the court as it was found to be barred by the principles of res judicata due to previous judgments involving the same parties and issues.
Key Reasoning:
The suit was dismissed on the grounds of res judicata as similar matters were already adjudicated in earlier suits.
Why Defendant Won:
The suit was dismissed on the grounds of res judicata as similar matters were already adjudicated in earlier suits.
Supporting Evidence
Therefore, the judgment and decree in AS 155/2020 passed by the second Additional District Court Kozhikode is binding on plaintiff and the defendants.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sujith K.M.
Party Age
42
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika
Party Age
55
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
P. Baburajan
Party Age
65
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Jenmam assignment deed No.846/2014, Land Tax receipt
Defendants Documents
Copy of the plaint in OS 276/2016, Certified copy of deposition of PW1 in OS 276/2016

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P. Rajmohan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Shajee K.
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
G.Manoharlal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Amrutha Bindu
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought a perpetual injunction to restrain defendants from trespassing.
Evidence:
This court finds that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree for perpetual injunction.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Jenmam assignment deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves plaintiff's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the plaintiff has been paying land tax for A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Registration copy of jenmam assignment deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Pertains to the title of plaint B schedule property owned by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Judgment in previous suit OS 276/2016.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Certified copy of decree
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Decree in previous suit OS 276/2016.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Certified Copy of Judgment
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Judgment in appeal AS 155/2018.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Certified copy of decree
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Decree in appeal AS 155/2018.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Copy of the plaint
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Plaint in previous suit OS 276/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Certified copy of deposition
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Deposition of plaintiff in OS 276/2016.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Reports from the commissioner about property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C1 (series)
Document Type: Commission sketch
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Sketches submitted by the commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C2 (series)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
KOZHIKODE
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Fri, 01/31/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Canara Bank vs M/S U.B. Hardwares regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Panakkal Mammedkoya vs Fabir et al regarding partition
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Saseendran vs Sreedharan et al regarding possession of property
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kalarikandy Subash Babu (died), Durga Devi, Bindya, Sandya vs Kasthuri Bai, Ramani Bai regarding partition of property.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Moideen.V.P vs Pathumma et al regarding setting aside a final decree
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Civil Suit Defendant Won