Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT NO : 588/2018

Case between V. Doraswami vs T. Rajeev et al regarding permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction

Court
THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Smt. Shabeena M.
Order Date
2025-01-30
Duration
approximately-6 years 1 month
Case Closed
Thu, 01/30/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, V. Doraswami, is involved in a case against the defendants, T. Rajeev and K.S. Ashraf Ali, concerning a dispute over access to a property owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff is seeking an injunction to prevent the defendants from trespassing and obstructing access to the property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent injunction against the defendants to prevent them from trespassing and obstructing access to the plaintiff's property. The defendants were also ordered to demolish any illegal structures they constructed.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction directing the defendants to demolish illegal structures.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting a permanent injunction against the defendants to prevent them from trespassing and obstructing access to the plaintiff's property. The defendants were also ordered to demolish any illegal structures they constructed.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff provided clear evidence establishing ownership and uninterrupted possession of the property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff provided clear evidence establishing ownership and uninterrupted possession of the property.
Supporting Evidence
The oral evidence of PW1 and PW2 and the documents produced by PW1 remained unchallenged. As such I find that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for permanent prohibitory injunction as well as mandatory injunction.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1) The defendants are restrained by way of permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint B schedule way and from preventing free vehicular access through the plaint B schedule way...

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
V. Doraswami
Party Age
82
Relation
S/o. Late N.V. Chettiyar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
T. Rajeev
Party Age
44
Relation
S/o. V. Thyagarajan
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
K.S. Ashraf Ali
Party Age
40
Relation
S/o. Konthalam
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of will executed by V. Rajagopal, Certified copy of will executed by Rajammal.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. V. Sreenath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendants are restrained from trespassing into the plaint B schedule way.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by way of permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction from trespassing into the plaint B schedule way and from preventing free vehicular access through the plaint B schedule way.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendants are directed to demolish the illegal structures constructed in the plaint B schedule way.
Evidence:
The defendants are directed by a mandatory injunction to demolish the illegal structures constructed in the plaint B schedule way and to remove the display board and also to demolish the iron grill as well as the Verandah shown as PSTU in Ext. C3 within one month from today.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Will
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the will executed by V. Rajagopal.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Will
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the will executed by Rajammal.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission Report submitted by Adv. Vincent Thykadan.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission plan submitted by Adv. Vincent Thykadan.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission Report submitted by Adv. Nikhil T.M.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission plan submitted by Adv. Nikhil T.M.
Reference:
Ext.C2(a)
Document Type: Commission Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission plan submitted by Adv. Nikhil T.M.
Reference:
Ext.C3

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 V. Doraswami vs T. Rajeev et al regarding permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between V. Doraswami vs T. Rajeev et al regarding permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode Taluk
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Tue, 01/30/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Thu, 01/30/2025 - 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 Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
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 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