M.M PAREED PILLAY
T. Prasad – Appellant
Versus
P. D. Punnoose – Respondent
Appellants are the defendants. Plaintiffs (respondents) filed the suit for prohibitory and mandatory injunction on the allegation that the defendants have demolished the western boundary of their property for laying a pathway. Plaintiff's also sought for a mandatory injunction to restore the western boundary in its original condition. The trial Court decreed the suit and granted permanent prohibitory. injunction restrainirig the defendants from trespassing upon the plaint schedule property or destroying its boundaries or committing any acts of waste therein. They were also directed by a mandatory injunction to restore the western boundary of the plaint schedule property in its original condition. The SubJudge confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal by the defendants.
2. In view of Ext. C-2(a) survey plan, it was found by the Courts below that no portion of the plaint schedule property is purampokku as contended by the defendants. The Courts held that western boundary wall of the plaint schedule property was demolished at the instance of the defendants on the eve of suit and also after suit: That being a finding of fact cannot be assa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.