Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.994/2022

Case between Thulaseedharan.B. vs Bindu et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction

Court
Court of Additional Munsiff (RCC)
Judge
Smt.Salini.B
Order Date
2025-01-15
Duration
Case Code No.
994
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioner, Thulaseedharan.B., filed a petition for a temporary prohibitory injunction against defendants Bindu and Geetha regarding an alleged trespass on his property. The case revolves around property ownership disputes and the right to construct on adjacent lands.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court vacated the ad interim injunction granted in favor of the plaintiff. The decision was based on the finding that the plaintiff had not made out a prima facie case.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court vacated the ad interim injunction granted in favor of the plaintiff. The decision was based on the finding that the plaintiff had not made out a prima facie case.
Key Reasoning:
The balance of convenience lies in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a prima facie case.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It is further prima facie revealed that there is no property in existence in the spot as described as plaint A schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the ad interim injunction granted in IA.1/2022 dated 21.07.2022 is hereby vacated.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Thulaseedharan.B.
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Bindu
Party Age
56
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Geetha
Party Age
56
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale deed No.1871/2022, Sale deed No.3809/1981, Land Tax Receipt
Defendants Documents
Copy of Pokkuvaravu Details No-5879, Copy of Sale deed No-4071/2001

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Thonnakkal G.Rajeev
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Aswani.P.S
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.Sony.A
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Bar Registration
CP1
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt. Anjana Ashok
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Bar Registration
CP2
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt. Anjali Ashok
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Bar Registration
CP2

Reliefs

Relief Type: Temporary Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Request for an order of temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendants from trespassing and construction.
Evidence:
Hence the petitioner has not made out a prima facie case, balance of convenience lies in favour of defendants and also irreparable injury will be caused to the defendants, if an ad interim injunction granted dated 21.07.2022 was made absolute.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document showing the plaintiff's claim of ownership of the petition A schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document showing the history of ownership of the property connected to the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Thandaper Kanakku
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document detailing property ownership and tax details related to the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document evidencing tax payment for the property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document evidencing tax payment for the property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document evidencing tax payment for the property by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: RTI Reply
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Series of documents detailing permits and approvals connected to the plaintiff's construction.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Pokkuvaravu Details
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document relating to the defendants' property claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Pokkuvaravu Details
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document relating to the defendants' property claims.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Copy of Proceedings
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document evidencing details regarding the property status of the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Reply from Tahasildar
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document giving the defendants' perspective on property claims.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Filed Sketch
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document used to outline and clarify property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Filed Sketch
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document used to outline and clarify property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Document showing history of ownership connected to the defendants' claims.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Document providing findings of the commission related to property identification.
Reference:
Ext.C1

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
2022

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

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