0% found this document useful (0 votes)
56 views9 pages

In The Court of The Munsiff, Kochi Present:-Sri. Nishad Ibrahim, Principal Munsiff

The court case O.S. No. 257/2023 involves a suit filed by I.C. Francis seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the Edakochi-Chettipadam Padasekhara Karshaka Union to prevent the construction of a concrete bridge over his property. The plaintiff asserts ownership of the land and claims that the defendants have no right to alter the existing wooden bridge, which is essential for his paddy and prawn cultivation. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting the injunction and ordering the defendants to pay the costs of the suit.

Uploaded by

Shaheer Ali
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
56 views9 pages

In The Court of The Munsiff, Kochi Present:-Sri. Nishad Ibrahim, Principal Munsiff

The court case O.S. No. 257/2023 involves a suit filed by I.C. Francis seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the Edakochi-Chettipadam Padasekhara Karshaka Union to prevent the construction of a concrete bridge over his property. The plaintiff asserts ownership of the land and claims that the defendants have no right to alter the existing wooden bridge, which is essential for his paddy and prawn cultivation. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting the injunction and ordering the defendants to pay the costs of the suit.

Uploaded by

Shaheer Ali
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 9

O.S.No.

257/2023 1

IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOCHI

Present :-

Sri. Nishad Ibrahim, Principal Munsiff

Thursday the 28th day of May, 2024/ 7th Jaishta, 1946

O.S. No. 257/2023

Plaintiff:-
I.C. Francis, aged 67 years, S/o.Chauro. r/at Ikkaratt House,
C.C.No.15/1974 Edakochi Village, Kochi Taluk, Kochi – 682
006.

By Adv. N.D. Premnath

Defendants:-
1. Edakochi–Chettipadam Padasekhara Karshaka Union,
Edakochi, Kochi – 6, rep by its present President Anthey
Godfrey, aged 55 years, S/o.Lazar Godfrey r/at Kalappurakkal
House, Edakochi, Kochi – 682 010.

2. The Secretary, Edakochi Chettipadam Padasekhara Karshaka


Union, rep by its present Secretary Vincy Francis, aged 56 years,
D/o.K.M. Francis, Ikkanattu House, Edakochi, Cochin – 682
010.

By Advs. P.P. Raphaelkutty & P.R. Thomachan (Ex-parte)

This suit come up for hearing on 28.5.2024 and the court on the
same day passed the following:-
O.S.No.257/2023 2

JUDGMENT

Suit is one for permanent prohibitory injunction.

2. The plaint summary is as follows :- a) The plaintiff is

the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the property having

an extent of 82 cents of paddy field comprised in Sy. No.166/1 of

Edakochi Village. The plaintiff obtained the property as per the

partition deed No.1779/1973 of S.R.O Kochi which is particularly

described as the plaint A schedule property. The plaint A schedule

property is used for paddy cultivation for a period of 6 months time and

for another 6 months’ time, it is used for prawn cultivation, which is

managed and under the control and supervision of the defendants. The

1st defendant is the organization handling the entire paddy fields in that

area consisting of more than about 50 Acres of land. All the paddy field

owners are the members of the Padasekhara Union. They entrust and

authorize the 1st defendant to effect paddy cultivation directly by

Padasekharam or to give on rent to anybody or on contract basis and to

collect the earnings from the cultivation and to distribute to its


O.S.No.257/2023 3

members including providing fertilizers aid, financial and for the

cultivation. The prawn cultivation is also given on rent or on contract

basis or auctioned by the Padasekharam Committee for the benefit of

the paddy field owners and make all the arrangement to the parties.

b) The prawn cultivation in the Padasekharam begins from

2023 November 1st onwards and the agreement will be executed in the

last week of October, 2023. To the knowledge of the plaintiff, the

agreement for prawn cultivation in the plaint A schedule will be signed

and executed on or before 28th October, 2023 and the necessary

arrangements will be done by the contractor on 30 th October 2023 and

the contract begins from 1st November, 2023 up to 6 months. After

executing the agreement for prawn cultivation, the plaint A schedule

property and the other paddy fields under the Padasekharam will be

under the control and management of the contractor.

c) On 20.10.2023, the defendants informed the plaintiff that

some persons residing on the western side of the plaint A schedule

property were pressurising the President and the Secretary to effect

construction of a concrete bridge over the thodu on the western end of


O.S.No.257/2023 4

the plaint A schedule property which is connecting to a bund lying in

the East-West direction near to the northern boundary of the plaintiff’s

paddy field, which was used for catching and feeding the prawn and

also for watching the entire area. The said bund is a private bund used

exclusively by the plaintiff and the persons authorized either by the

plaintiff or the Padasekharam Committee in connection with the work

of the paddy cultivation and the prawn cultivation. At present, there is

a wooden bridge over the thodu on the western side of the plaint A

schedule property, which is described as the plaint B schedule

property.

d) Earlier on 26.01.2011, when the plaintiff was out of station,

due to the influence of some local politicians, the Cochin Corporation

authorities constructed a granite bund through the plaintiff’s property

on east west direction with an intention to create a new pathway and

also put a wooden bridge over the thodu on the western end of the

plaint A schedule property connecting the newly constructed bund

without the consent and knowledge of the plaintiff. Against the

unauthorized construction made by the Kochi Corporation, plaintiff


O.S.No.257/2023 5

instituted a suit before the Munsiff’s Court Kochi as 0.S No. 50/2011.

The suit was decreed on 11.01.2013 by an order of permanent

prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant or any body claiming

under it from encroaching in to the plaint A schedule property or doing

anything detrimental to the plaintiffs ownership and possession thereof

otherwise than by due process of law and again the defendant was

directed to demolish and remove the plaint B schedule granite bound

and bridge specifically shown in Ext C1(a) plan and the defendant was

also further directed to construct a granite bund through the northern

boundary of the plaint A schedule property in the place of the

demolished old bund of the plaintiff within three months by an order

of mandatory injunction.

e) There is already a wooden bridge over the thodu on the

western end portion of the plaint A schedule property connecting the

existing bund. The demand of some persons to the office bearers of the

Padasekharam Committee was to construct a concrete bridge over the

thodu instead of the old wooden bridge for ingress and egress. The said

demand was made only for illegal catching of prawn and to cause
O.S.No.257/2023 6

troubles to the contractor and to his workers in the prawn cultivation.

As per the order of the Munsiff's Court, Kochi in OS No.50/2011, the

existing bund in the plaint A schedule property is in the exclusive

possession, enjoyment and ownership of the plaintiff and nobody has

any right over the plaintiff’s property. The defendants have no right to

construct any concrete bridge over the thodu on the western side of

plaintiff’s paddy field and has no right to remove the existing wooden

bridge over the thodu on the western side of plaintiff’s property.

Hence the suit was instituted for restraining the defendants from

erecting any new concrete bridge over the thodu on the western side of

the plaint A schedule property instead of the present existing wooden

bridge over the thodu by means of a permanent prohibitory injunction.

3. The defendants did not file written statement. Hence they

were set exparte.

4. The plaintiff was examined as PW1. Exts.A1 to A3 were

marked. Ext.A1 is the certified copy of the partition deed

No.1779/1973 of SRO Kochi. Ext.A2 is the land tax receipt dated

25.09.2023 and Ext.A3 is the certified copy of judgment dated


O.S.No.257/2023 7

11.01.2013 in OS No.50/2011 of Munsiff Court, Kochi.

5. Heard.

6. The uncontroverted proof affidavit of PW1 along with the

documents marked on the side of the plaintiff would entitle him to get

a decree as prayed for in the plaint. No contra evidence was tendered.

Hence the plaintiff is entitled to get a decree as prayed for.

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows:-

i) The defendants and their men are restrained by way of a

permanent prohibitory injunction from erecting any new

concrete bridge over the thodu on the western side of the

plaint A schedule property instead of the present existing

wooden bridge over the thodu.

ii) The defendants are jointly and severally directed to pay the

costs of the suit to the plaintiff.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed by


her, corrected and pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 28 th
day of May, 2024.
Sd/-
Nishad Ibrahim
Principal Munsiff
O.S.No.257/2023 8

APPENDIX :-

Plaintiff’s Exhibits
A1 Certifide copy of the Partition deed No.1779/1973 of
SRO, Kochi.
A2 25.09.2023 The land tax receipt..

A3 Certifide copy of the Judgment 11.01.2013 in


O.S.50/2011 of Munsiff’s Court, Kochi..
Petitioner’s Witness:-
PW1 11.04.2024 I.C. Francis
Defendant’s Witness:- Nil
Court Exhibits :- Nil

Sd/-
Principal Munsiff
//True Copy//

///True Copy///

Principal Munsiff

copied.by:Bi
compd.by:
O.S.No.257/2023 9

Order in
O.S. No.257/2023
Dtd: 28.05.2024

You might also like