Case Summary
T.K. Shibu is the plaintiff seeking a perpetual and mandatory injunction against Sandeep P.V., the defendant, regarding illegal construction that violates municipal building rules and affects the well on the plaintiff's property.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant's construction violated building rules, leading to the dismissal of the suit.
Key Reasoning:
The defendant complied with all necessary building regulations and permits.
The defendant complied with all necessary building regulations and permits.
Why Defendant Won:
The defendant complied with all necessary building regulations and permits.
The defendant complied with all necessary building regulations and permits.
Supporting Evidence
The oral evidence of DW1, DW2 & DW3 coupled with Ext.B1 to B15 probabilise the case of the defendant that the plaintiff dug a well in a later point of time without proper permit and in violation of rules.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- T.K. Shibu
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sandeep P.V.
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- S/o.
Plaintiffs Documents
Janmam assignment deed No.2347/2015, Building permit No.TP 16-TBA (38286)/17, Complaint filed by T.K. Shibu to the Secretary, Kozhikode Corporation.
Defendants Documents
Janmam assignment deed No.1046/08, Copies of settlement deeds, Commission report filed by Adv. K.B. Sivaramakrishnan.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.P. Gangadharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P.C. Satheesh
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.P. Rajagopal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- S. Farha
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a decree for perpetual injunction against the defendant's construction.
Evidence:
Upon considering the above discussed facts and evidence, this court comes to a conclusion that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant had made construction in the plaint B schedule property violating the building rules.
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a decree for mandatory injunction to stop the defendant from using the constructed facilities.
Evidence:
As such this Court finds that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree of mandatory injunction as prayed for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Janmam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff claims title to the property based on this document.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff uses this document to assert that the defendant's construction is illegal as it violates the permit's stipulations.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff's grievance against the defendant's construction activities was formally registered using this document.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document reflects an official communication regarding the construction dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Janmam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The defendant refers to this document to establish ownership over the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document supports the defendant's claim to the property and its compliance with legal norms.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Part of the documentation establishing the defendant's title and ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Another supporting document for the ownership claims made by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Provides findings related to the existing conditions on the properties described.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
A visual representation accompanying the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.B5(a)
Document Type:
Accounts in Commission report
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Financial details associated with the commission report for transparency.
Reference:
Ext.B5(b)
Document Type:
FDIA final decree
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This decree provides legal context on the defendant's past claims regarding property postures.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Janmam Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Supports the defendant's ownership claim to their property.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Evidence of property tax payments, supporting the claim of possession.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Legitimizes the defendant's construction activities as being within legal parameters.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type:
Residence Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Confirms the defendant's official residency in the constructed house.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type:
Occupancy Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Acknowledges the legality of the construction undertaken by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document evidences the defendant's formal complaint regarding the plaintiff's illegal activities.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Served to engage the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre concerning property regulations.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type:
Report and remarks
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Constitutes a critical piece of evidence supporting the defendant’s claims regarding the well.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Official procedure from the Kozhikode Municipal Corporation directing the plaintiff to rectify the well.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The court relies on this report to assess the factual positions of the properties.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Supports the findings in the Commission Report related to property disputes.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
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 T.K. Shibu vs Sandeep P.V. regarding perpetual injunction and mandatory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between T.K. Shibu vs Sandeep P.V. regarding perpetual injunction and mandatory injunction