0 BEFORE THE. HON’BLE MUNSIFF’S COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA 0. S.No. of 2021 Between ayachandran Nair Pla G. Jay And intiff thyamma 4, Saraswathyé Defendants, 2. Vinodkumar 3. Ramachandran 4. Sumeshkumar ; 5, Executive Engineer, PIP Division 6, Chengannur & Sreenath J Nair Suit instituted under Sec.26 Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Name and Address of the Plaintiff:- G. Jayachandran Nair, Slo Gangadharan Nair, aged 63 years, Elamplavil House, Elanthoor P.O., Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. Name and Address of the Defendants: 1. Saraswathiamma, W/o Gopinathan Nair, aged about 70: years, Kottackal House, Elanthoor P.O., Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. 2. Vinodkumar, S/o Gopinathan Nair, aged about 32 years, Kottackal House, Kottackal House, Elanthoor P.O., Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. 3. Ramachandran, S/o Narayanan, aged about 70 years, Venattu Kalayil Elanthoor P.O. Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. 4. Sumeshkumar, S/o Ramachandran, aged about 38 years, Venatiu Kalayil, Elanthoor P.O. Elanthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District, 5. The Executive Engineer, PIP Division, Chengannur P.O., Chengannur\ 8. Sreenath J Nair, Slo G. Jayachaidran Nair, aged 32 years, Elamplavil House, Elanthoor P.O., Elatthoor Village, Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. The address for service of all notices 2" other court process on the Plaintiff is in the care of his counsels Sri. Anil P Va'Sh¢se. Leslie Daniel, Johnson M.S. and Linto M. Loyid, Advocates, Eapen & Atl! ‘ssociates, Ayyappaiyothi Building, T.K Road, Pathanamthitta, and that of the D*'sngants ig as shown above. Plaintiff Advocate:mages ; injunction, 42! The suit is for Permanent prohibitory iNjUNCtign mandatory injun' and for consequential reliefs. The Plaintiff most respectfully SUDMIts 25 foligws: rvice and 4. The plaintiff is a senior citizen retired fron, the State Government Sel is, currently, an Agriculturist. Defendants a, neighbours of the plant in Re Plaint schedule property is an extent of 4 are 4s q, metres cor defendant survey No.121/5/1 of Elanthoor Village which belongs to the No. 769 of who isthe son of the plant, by vitue of phananischaya Deed No. 1% 2016 of Pathanamthitta SRO. The property, originally belonged to the Ot mf and Smt. Sreekumary, his wife, by Vittue of sale Deed No. 1520 of ttled SRO, Pathanamthitta. Later, in 2016, the paint schedule property was Se life in favour of the 6" defendant as Mentioned hereinbefore, reserving the Ff : interest of the plaintiff and his wife. The & defendant is out of the an fo employment. Therefore, the plaintiff 'S in possession of the property an 4 residing in the residential building therein, The plaint schedule property i lying within well-defined boundaries. Tax in respect of the property is being paid. The original title deed and the Prior deed are deposited with State Bank of India, Branch Pathanamthitta as Security for a loan. Hence the certified copy of the said deed is produced herewith. A copy of the prior deed, i.e, Sale Deed No.1520 of 2011 of SRO, Pathanamthitta, duly certified by the State Bank of India, Branch Pathanamthitta is also produced. Copy of the latest tax receipt in respect of the plaint schedule property is also produced herewith. . The 5" defendant and the 6" defendent ere included in the party array for the conclusiveness of the findings in the Suit. No relief is sought as against those defendants. Therefore, no notice is to be served to the 5'" defendant in advance, regarding the subject matter or the institution of the suit. Plaintiff has no adverse interest against the 5" defendant or the 6" defendant, as regards the subject matter of the suit. 4. The 2™ defendant is the son of the 1° defendant and the 4" defendant is the son of the 3 defendant. The 1° defendant and the 2" defendant are residing on the north of the plaint schedule property. The 3 defendant and the 4" defendant are residing in the house on further north of the property of the 1* defendant and the 2 defendant. Elanthoor- Omallur road lies in east west direction. At Ganapathiambalam Junction, it deviates to north and passes by the High School Junction. From High School Junction, the said road iakes a turn to the east for about 300 metres metres and reaches the PIP canal where there are two roads situated on either side of the canal, one on its east and the other on its west. Both the toads are known as canal roads. The plaintiff and his family members are using the canal road on the east of tiie Canal, which is an untarred one, for their ingress to and egress from the plaint schedule property situated at about 130 feet from the start of the said canal road Plaintiff and his family members enter and exit the plaint dule property through the cartable sandy soil road on its south westsrqcorner where the plaint property connects with the property of Smt Bind, from whom the plaintiff purchased the plaint schedule property. 6. The defendants are using the Canaj which is a tarred one, for their ingress x N o a Road on the west of the PIP Canal, io and egress from their properties, At Plaintiff: Advocate.age about 100 Metres fro) . @ bridge that connects He said tated canal road towards the north, there is €astern end of the said bri Canal roads, referred to hereinbefore. At the North to reach their house a2 they and 4” defendants take a tum to the South to reach their Proj : 'e 1** and 2” defendants take a turn to the length of 30 ft and Width aap The said bridge is having an approximate - There is a heap of soil in be et al Toad on its west, spread alo 2h the plaint schedule property and the ot Property. The approximate lenw tie entire frontage of the plaint schedule average width is 6 feet. The pat” of the said heap of soil is 60 feet and the the sandy soil canal road, Ff heap of sol has an avereve Dela eter) upto the sai | te biainti has been in possession ofthe property pio the said heap of soil from ye i hase of the property. He has been doing cuttivati api: ber since the purchase intiff and the 6" defend an ONS in the entire property. Of late, the Plaintiff a Be fant had some doubts regarding the extent of the plaint chedule property consequent to which they gave objection to the Tahsildar concemed for survey and demarcation. Taluk Surveyor had conducted the Survey and demarcation by Putting stones identifying the boundaries of the Plaint schedule Property affresh, in the said survey which was done in July 2021, it was identified thafa part of the property “admeasuring- an . approximate area of 2 cents on the western portion of the plaint schedule Property belongs to the 5" defendant. Apart from this, it was also identified that an approximate 2 cents of land close to the eastern portion of the plaint schedule Property which was in the possession of the vendors in the Sale Deed No.1520 of 2011, in fact, was part of the plaint schedule property. The plaintiff and his son or the above mentioned Bindu, the vendor of the said Sale Deed of 2011 did Not object to the Said survey and demarcation and the extent of the plaint Schedule properties is confirmed by the parties to the Sale Deed of 2011. Prior to the Survey and demarcation of the plaint schedule Property which was done at the instarce of the plaintiff and the 6" defendant in early July 2021, the plaintiff has grown agricultural Crops, trees, plants and other cultivations in the western Portion of the plaint schedule Property which is now identified as belonging to the 5" defendant, along with the cultivations in the other part of the Property. Ayo4t 8. While so, on 28" September 2021, atabout 11 AM the defendants along with their henchmen rushed to the plaint schedule property with JCB weapons such as pick axe, knives. They started di igging soil from the plaint schedule Property, using JCB. The defendanis and their henchmen destroyed the Cultivation in the plaint property and the cultivation of the plaintiff in. the strip Of land currently belonging to the 5” defendant. The plaintiff and his wife who are sick and aged resisted the actions of the defendants. However, the defendants continued their aggression. The defendants! YBstroyed 18 plantain trees / banana trees (Vazha) belonging to the plainti# out of which 3 were ripe to be cut for sale in the Maret, The defendants destroyed 3 Neem trees, 2 Rose apple (Champa) trees and a lot of outdoor plants grown in growbags, by the wife of the plaintiff tumbering to about 15. The plaintiff has Suffered an estimated damages of R.30,000/- in all as a result of the waste Committed by the defendants. The defendants are also liable to pay the said amount as damages to the plaintiff. 8. The plaintiff informed the police Wh® turned up after a while and warned the defendants against committing wast® in the property, After committing a lot of mischief in the property and trespassing yon the plaint schedule property Plaintiff: Advocate12. 1 o 14, . Though the plaintiff has informed about the ab “4. tne plaint Schedule property, they have returned and annexing portions re retiring from es plant property, they had ee plant and his We "St they would accomplish their task, d ime S Somehow oF ote aed from the PrOPerty of the 5" defendant and the plaint erty and the desttOYe4 cultvations were thrown forcefully by schedule ee and their henchm i the remaining portions of the plaint the defend erty whereas the heaP Of soil on the west of the plaint schedule schedule pr the east of the CaMAl roaq Temained untouched by the property arr eir intention was "© Sonstuct a new pathway. by taking of the plaint schedule aoe and to make it cartable. The have no manner of rl . do so. The defendants have no right pon the plaint schedule Property, The defendants threatened the t allow the Construction of the pathway, they by them, taking portions of the dy soil extra portions © defendants to trespass UP Pe cid nol inti t, if the plaintit Caan a new pathway as PlOposeq plaint schedule property In the circumstances, the defendants are to be restrained by an order of In ibitory injunction from Committing further waste in the plaint permanent a The ‘plaintf is 2'S0 entitled to an order of mance aa ainst the defendants for 'emoving the stones, soil and other stuff Enea in he plaint schedule property. He is also entitled to get the nature and lie of the property restored [0 its original position. Moreover, the| defendants are liable to compensate the. plaintit for the damages caused to\ the plaintiff by: way of loss of plants. Cultivation, trees, agricultural crops etc. | which is estimated by the plaintiff as Rs:30,000/- - The defendants are influential and a'€ Supported by the local political parties who are in power. The plaintiff is incapable of resisting their illegal acts. The plaintiff is isolated and is helpless. The plaintiff apprehends that the defendants and their men will trespass into the plaint schedule Property any time for constructing the path waj, forcefully. The defendants are also supported by the ruling political front and, hence, are bent upon to construct the new pathway at any cost. They are influential. The high handed acts of the defendants cannot be thwarted by the plaintiff. Hence, the plaintiff is seeking the intervention of the Hon'ble Court. ove said incident and the Police, the plaintiff does not 's of the defendants by the Police. The tiff is that the defendants will go to any ing in the matter, so as to enable them chedule property. The defendants know is alone with his aged wife and are, ‘ness of the plaintiff to accomplish their apprehension of further trespass to Aranmula expect an effort to stop the illegal act reasonable apprehension of the plain extent to stop the police from interfer to do further mischief in the plaint s that the plaintiff is aged, sick and therefore, trying to encash the weak evil designs. The defendants have no right over lhe property which belongs, absolutely, to the 6" defendant and the possess. Er ae is with the plaintiff. The apprehension of the plaintiff 1S that the defendants will perpetrate plaint Fe, broperty by force, any time, any day. The arbitrary and illegal acts oh +4 eee and their men Can be prevented only by the intervention of lon'ble Court. Itis in the said Citcumstances that the Plaintiff is Plaintiff: Advocateconstrained to sue. The py Prohibitory injunction, mang js entitled to a decree of Permanent consequential reliefs. Hence 40% injunction and for damages along 15, The cause of action for the © Su the defendants ‘and. thei ult hag arisen on 28.09.2021, the date on which property and attempted to g®"thmen trespassed upon plaint_schedtle western boundary of plaint Stuct ‘a new path way by demolishing we) threw waste and unwanteq mato property, on which date the eee teri erty and destroyed the Cultivations, agricultural crop, “tials to the plaint prop: ia the plaintiff and continuously thereafter in Ela and plants belonging Hon'ble Court. nth oor Village, within the territorial limits of the v Al LUATION aD COURT FEE For the purpose of court fee an ancora oR. St cen oc ee Rs. 20 (Rupees Twenty only) is pavable under Section 27 (c) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act fee and the same is paid herewith. The relief of mandatory injunction is aigy yalued at Rs Rs. SO0/- (Rupees Five Hundred only) and a court fee of Rs. 20/- (Rupees Twenty only) is payable under Sec. Section 27 (c) of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 which is paid herewith. The court fee Payable for damages estimated as Rs.30,000/- is Rs. 1800/- and Rs.180/- being 1/10" of the said amount is also paid herewith. An amount of Rs.100/- (Rupees One Hundred only) is payable towards Legal Benefit Fund as provided under Sec.76 of the Act and the same is also paid herewith RELIEFS Hence it is most respectfully prayed tnat the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass a decree in favour of the Plaintiff: ) restraining the Defendants 1 to 4 and their men by a permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing upon any portion of the plaint schedule property, from cutting open a new pathway annexing portions of the plaint property, from committing further waste in the plaint schedule property and from interfering in any manner with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the Plaintiff b) directing the defendants 1 to 4 by a mandatory injunction against them to remove the waste materials, sandy soil, agricultural crops, destroyed cultivations etc., thrown into the plaint property and to restore the nature and lie to its original position or in the alternative to allow the plaintiff to do so and recover the cost of the same from the defendants 1 to 4 and their assets c) directing the defendants 1 to 4 to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the plaintiff by ‘way of damages for the Waste committed in the plaint schedule property, in default of which to allow the plaintiff to recover the said amount with interest @ 12 % per anMUM from the defendants 1 to 4 and their assets Plaintiff: AdvocatePlaintiff: G , th the costs of the sult inte © Defendant; and grant uch 0 jiefs that 2° "und necessary and deemed fit by the nting $ evarble Court to grant " day of pated this the 30” %Y °F September 2021 Jayachandran Nair Advocate: Anil. P. Varghese inf SCHEDULE OF PROPER Pathanamthitta District thitt istris - Pathanamnitta Se . Kozhenchery Village - Elanthoor Panchayath - — Elanthoor Old Sy. No. - 45/7A Resurvey No. So 121/5/1 Block No. - 10 Extent - 4Are 45. Sq. metres Boundaries East - Property of Elamplavil Bindu South - Property of Elamplavil Bindu West - PIP CanalRoad North - Property belonging to the 1° defendant Description The property having an extent of 4 Are 45 sq metres in Re Survey No. 121/5/1 of Block No.10 of Elanthoor Village, within the above said boundaries and everything situate therein Dated this the 30" day of September 2021 Plaintiff: G Jayachandran Nair Advocate: Anil P Varghese Verification IG i eee oe Gangaqharan Nair, aged 63 years, Elamplavil Pahanamthita Distict.deciae feo ae ota hee att 1S above are gues |. declare that ail the facts stated in paragraphs 1 to Beier Correct to the best of my knowledge, information and tification is signed by me on this the 30” day of September 2021 at the office i, Pathanamthitts of Sri. Anil p Varghese, Advocate, my counsel at Plaintiff: G Jayachandran NairUST oF D c Oo [ SI] Date] ay yp Wents suemirteD No | | Execute TRY _ _ | ed | & “hom | Description of the Points | Stuted document | tobe | | ae proved | + ("2042016 | Plain & hig — Wife Senath | | | a) Settlement Deed | Plaint Lo . No.796 of 2016 Claim J I | Pathanamthitta SRO | 2. |02.06 | Bindhy | Paint | Sale Deed h No.1520 of |, } 08.2011 | | &his | 2014 Pathanamthitta 77+". Wife SRO. | | . if Village} —_| | Officer Copy of Tax Receipt | 3. | 11.06.2021) f ne | Steenath No. |} | anthoor KL03020202413/2021» | Lt | JL Dated this the 30th day of September 2021 raue COPY ATTESTED Advocate: Anil. P Varghese