Babu v. Alias and Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal against dismissal of suit for title declaration and prohibitory injunction. Court held suit frivolous as it sought to obstruct the defendants' right of way under Ext A3 and dismissed appeal with costs.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent from the appellant.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY,THE 06TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 17TH MAGHA, 1940
RSA.No. 1118 of 2009(G)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.8.2006 IN AS 80/2003 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,NORTH PARAVUR
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 8.4.2003 IN OS 162/1998 of MUNSIFF COURT,PERUMBAVOOR
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:
BABU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. MATHAI, KARUPPAN HOUSE,, PRALAICODU KARA, VENGOOR WEST VILLAGE.
BY ADVS.
SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.MANOJ B.MENON
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the second appeal is maintainable on the ground that the appellate court failed to discuss the matter elaborately under Order 41 Rule 31 CPC.
Whether the suit for declaratory relief and permanent prohibitory injunction is maintainable when the claim infringes upon an established right of way.
Whether the second appeal ought to be dismissed with costs due to the frivolous nature of the claim?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
BABU (Now Appellant)
- respondent
1 ALIAS
- respondent
LISSY
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court