Case Summary
This case involves Usha Kumari and Jithil Kumar as plaintiffs seeking to prevent Ajith.G and S.Nizamudeen from obstructing their access to their properties. The plaintiffs argue that they have been legally using a pathway that the defendants are trying to block.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition and vacated the earlier injunction order against the defendants due to the failure of the plaintiffs to establish a prima facie case.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs did not demonstrate a prima facie case for an injunction.
The plaintiffs did not demonstrate a prima facie case for an injunction.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs did not demonstrate a prima facie case for an injunction.
The plaintiffs did not demonstrate a prima facie case for an injunction.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioners have not made out a prima facie case in their favour. The balance of convenience is also not in their favour.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed and the injunction order already granted in this IA on 13.09.2024 is hereby vacated.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Usha Kumari
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jithil Kumar
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ajith.G
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- S.Nizamudeen
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Release deed No.416/2020, Release deed No.1330/I/2024, Sale deed dated 15.06.1983, Tax receipt dated 03.07.2024, Tax receipt dated 23.02.2023, Possession certificate dated 10.07.2023, Sketch.
Defendants Documents
Draft copy of properties, Sale deed No.1624/2024, Sale deed No.2036/2011/I, Sale deed No.848/2010, Sale deed No.3214/1991, Sale deed No.55/2011, Sale deed No.3386/2010, Sale deed No.687/2012, Sale deed No.3194/2011, Sale deed No.1060/I/2022, Sale deed No.3658/2010, Survey plan, Complaint dated 01.08.2024, Tax receipt, Caveat filed by counter petitioners.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. G.Anil Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Rajaprathap.S.J.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioners sought an ad interim injunction to restrain the counter petitioners from obstructing their ingress and egress to the properties through the D schedule road.
Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed and the injunction order already granted in this IA on 13.09.2024 is hereby vacated.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the release deed by which the petitioners obtained their title and possession over the petition A to C schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Release deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the release deed by which the second petitioner got his title and possession over the petition A to C schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed by which the first petitioner got the title and possession of the petition A to D schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the tax receipt regarding the petition A schedule properties in favour of the 1st petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the tax receipt in favour of the second petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Possession Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the possession certificate in favour of the 1st petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the copy of a sketch relevant to the properties in question.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Draft Copy of Properties
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is a draft copy related to the properties in the counter claim.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of the first and second counter petitioners.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed by which the second counter petitioner and his wife have received the property.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed in favour of Sugatha Kumari.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of another party.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of a third party.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of another individual.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of a party.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by the second counter petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type:
Sale deed
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the sale deed executed by Sugatha Kumari in favour of another party.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type:
Survey Plan
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is a copy of the survey plan relevant to the properties.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is a complaint filed by Lake View Nagar residents regarding a demolition and trespass.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type:
Tax receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is a copy of the tax receipt in the name of Sugatha Kumari and another individual.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type:
Caveat
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document is the copy of the caveat filed by counter petitioners against the second petitioner.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This commission report provided findings relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This commission report further investigated aspects of the case.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2024