Case Summary
Suseelamma.T, the plaintiff, claims ownership of a property and seeks to prevent the defendant, Sabu, from encroaching on it. The defendant has allegedly attempted to trespass and increase his own property size at the expense of the plaintiff's land.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against encroachment
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendant from encroaching on the plaintiff's property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence established their ownership and the threat posed by the defendant.
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence established their ownership and the threat posed by the defendant.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence established their ownership and the threat posed by the defendant.
The plaintiff's unchallenged evidence established their ownership and the threat posed by the defendant.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff’s unchallenged evidence proves his case and he is entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction as sought for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs and the defendant and his henchmen are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from encroaching upon the plaint A schedule property or committing any waste in it.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Suseelamma.T
- Party Age
- 78
- Relation
- W/o.
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Narayana Prasad. S
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sabu
- Relation
- S/o.
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified Copy of Partition deed No.1175/2013, Copy of Tax Receipt
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.P Jayaraj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.S.P.Deepak
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.S.P Santhosh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Simi.U
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant and his henchmen from encroaching upon the plaint A schedule property or committing any waste in it.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs and the defendant and his henchmen are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from encroaching upon the plaint A schedule property or committing any waste in it.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the partition deed proving the plaintiff's ownership of the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of tax receipt indicating the plaintiff's payment of revenue tax for the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission report relevant to the proceedings and findings concerning the plaint A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Suseelamma.T vs Sabu regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Suseelamma.T vs Sabu regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction