Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
EASWARAN S., J
SUKUMARIYAMMA – Appellant
Versus
MEENAKSHI AMMA (DIED) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's decision was influenced by resolution of boundary disputes. (Para 1 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. plaintiff's encroachment undermines her claim for injunction. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. appeal's dismissal based on absence of legal ground. (Para 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
This appeal arises from the Judgment and decree dated 6.10.2010 of the Additional District Court-I, Mavelikkara, by which the decree granted in favour of the plaintiff in O.S. No 220 of 1998 by the Munsiff Court, Haripad, was reversed, and the suit was dismissed.
2. O.S. No.220 of 1998 was filed by the plaintiff seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from removing the barbed wire fence existing on the western side of the plaint A and B Schedule properties. The averments in the plaint show that the plaintiff owns plaint A schedule property exclusively and B Schedule property with the defendant. Pursuant to the transfer of the property in her favour, it is contended that a barbed wire fence on the western boundary of A schedule property was put up. Since there was an attempt by the defendants to remove the same, the suit was filed.
3. The defendants resisted the suit by contending that the extent of A schedule pro
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
