Radhika Ajithkumar Vs. Dileepkumar

Radhika Ajithkumar vs Dileepkumar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 04, 2014

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1125742

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1125742
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh
Decided On: Feb 04, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Radhika Ajithkumar

Respondent

Dileepkumar

Excerpt

.....of the sub court,ernakulam respondents exhibits nil true copy p.a to judge smm v.chitambaresh,j.= = = = = = = = = = = o.p.(c) no.329 of 2014 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = dated this the 4th day of february, 2014 judgment the court below has by the orders impugned permitted the decree holder to reconstruct the eastern boundary wall exactly on the same place where it now exists with granite foundation and cement brick. the same has been directed to be done by the amin under the supervision of the advocate commissioner who was deputed in the suit even. the police was also directed to give necessary police aid to execute the decree for injunction which has become final in rsa no.1353/2012.2. it is pointed out that the petitioners were unsuccessful in injuncting the decree holders from executing the decree in o.s no. 288/2007 even though motions were made in o.s no.939/2012. added to this is the fact that this court has in original petitions filed thereafter permitted the decree holder to execute the decree for injunction in o.s no.288/2007 by permissible mode. the orders impugned call for no interference and the original petition is dismissed. this will not affect o.s o.p.(c) no.329 of 2014 2 no.939/2012 pending or any other suit proposed to be filed on the basis of easement by necessity. v.chitambaresh judge smm

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY,THE4H DAY OF FEBRUARY201415TH MAGHA, 1935 OP(C).No. 329 of 2014 (O) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

/JUDGMENT

IN OS2882007 of PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM PETITIONERS/3RD & 4TH RESPONDENTS/3RD JD:-: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 1. RADHIKAAJITHKUMAR, AGED38EARS W/O.AJITHKUMAR, 14/350, AKHIL NIVAS ETTUTHAIKKAL, UDAYAMPEROOR P.O., UDAYAMPEROOR.

2. K.B.AJITHKUMAR, AKHIL NIVAS,DO.DO.DO. BY ADVS.SRI.BABU CHERUKARA SRI.P.A.SALIM SRI.ANZAR BASHEER SRI.PRATHEUSH.M.ANAND SRI.P.ANTO THOMAS RESPONDENT/D.H/PLAINTIFF:-: ------------------------------------------- P.DILEEPKUMAR,, AGED48YEARS S/O.PADMANABHA MENON, GOKULAM, KARURUTHIL ROAD UDAYAMPEROOR, NOW RESIDING AT14/D3, STAR HOMES CHATHARI, TRIPUNITHURA, PIN - 682 301. BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R. SHENOY THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0402-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(C).No. 329 of 2014 (O) -------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1 COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO.288/2007 DATED83-2007 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT,ERNAKULAM EXT.P2 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S. NO.288/2007 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM EXT.P3 ADDITIONAL WRITTEN STATEMENT INO.S. NO.288/2007 DATED141-2010 EXT.P4 PHOTOSTAT OF DECREE PASSED IN O.S. NO.288/2007 DATED2312-2011 EXT.P5 PHOTOSTAT OF EXECUTION PETITION NUMBERED AS E.P NO.104/2012 IN O.S. NO.288/2007 DATED2512-12 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT,ERNKULAM EXT.P6 COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.2068/1997 OF TRIPUNITHURA SUB REGISTRY DATED78-19897 EXT.P7 COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.975/1997 OF THE TRIPUNITHURA SUB REGISTRY DATED94-1997 EXT.P9 COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.47/2009 OF the TRIPUNITHURA SUB REGISTRY DATED81-2009 EXT.P10 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

IN RSA NO.1353/2012 DATED1211-2012 EXT.P11 COPY OF THE CORRECTION DEED NO.3631/2012 OF TRIPUNITHURA SUB REGISTRY DATED1711-2012 EXT.P12 COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S. NO.939/2012 OF THE SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED2311-2012 EXT.P13 COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT IN O.S. NO.939/2012 OF THE SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM IN I.A. NO.6574/2012 DATED2811-2012 EXT.P14 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

IN O.P.C NO.4301/2012 DATED1212-2012 EXT.P15 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S. NO.939/2012 DATED211-2013 OP(C).No. 329 of 2014 (O) -------------------------- EXT.P16 COPY of the WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE2D DEFENDANT IN O.S. NO.939/2012 OF THE SUB COURT ERNAKULAM,DATED182-2013 EXT.P17 COPY OF THE COMMISSION APPLICATION FILED BY THE IST PETITIONER FOR SURVEY AS PER I.A. NO.6653/2012 DATED2811-2012 . EXT.P18 COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER

DATED215-2013 IN E.A NO.98/2013 AND992013 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM EXT.P19 COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER

IN E.A NOS. 188/2013 AND5282013 DATED71-2014 EXT.P20 COPY OF THE REPORT AND SKETCH DATED301-2014 IN O.S NO.939/2012 OF THE SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE SMM V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

= = = = = = = = = = = O.P.(C) No.329 of 2014 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 4th day of February, 2014

JUDGMENT

The court below has by the orders impugned permitted the decree holder to reconstruct the eastern boundary wall exactly on the same place where it now exists with granite foundation and cement brick. The same has been directed to be done by the Amin under the supervision of the Advocate Commissioner who was deputed in the suit even. The police was also directed to give necessary police aid to execute the decree for injunction which has become final in RSA No.1353/2012.

2. It is pointed out that the petitioners were unsuccessful in injuncting the decree holders from executing the decree in O.S No. 288/2007 even though motions were made in O.S No.939/2012. Added to this is the fact that this Court has in original petitions filed thereafter permitted the decree holder to execute the decree for injunction in O.S No.288/2007 by permissible mode. The orders impugned call for no interference and the Original Petition is dismissed. This will not affect O.S O.P.(C) No.329 of 2014 2 No.939/2012 pending or any other suit proposed to be filed on the basis of easement by necessity. V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE smm

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2014 Same Parties Radhika Ajithkumar vs Dileepkumar Same Subject Education Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh