Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
, J
2nd defendant – Appellant
Versus
plaintiffs – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs established ownership and the 2nd defendant's trespass. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. legal possession vs. permissive occupation discussion under the dv act. (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 3. clarification that eviction procedures must follow legal protocols. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. distinction between customary rights and permissive occupation. (Para 12) |
| 5. court's ruling on extension of residence under conditional terms. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT
1. The 2nd defendant in a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction is the appellant. The Trial Court decreed the suit which was confirmed by the First Appellate Court.
2. The plaintiffs are the husband and wife. They are the aged parents of the 1st defendant. The 2nd defendant is the wife of the 1st defendant. The plaint schedule property and the residential building therein belonged to the plaintiffs as per Ext.A1. Originally, the suit was filed for prohibitory injunction. Thereafter, the suit was amended, including the prayer for mandatory injunction compelling the 2nd defendant to vacate the house in the plaint schedule property on the ground that the 2nd defendant trespassed into the plaint schedule property, breaking open the lock of the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
