Shaji, v. Sunny Jacob
Case brief
What is this about?
Three second appeals challenging decrees dismissing suits and granting mandatory injunctions for restoration of property allegedly forcibly cut by appellants. The court upheld lower courts' findings denying easement and ordered restoration.
What did the court decide?
Second appeals dismissed; decrees of lower courts affirmed; no survey commission required.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 17TH MAGHA, 1947
RSA.No.1196 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.03.2019 IN AS NO.42/2016 OF ADDL. DISTRICT COURT-III, PATHANAMTHITTA, WHICH AROSE FROM JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.01.2016 IN OS 159/2012 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/COUNTER CLAIM DEFENDANTS:
1 VARGHESE CHANDY, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O. CHANDY, RRESIDING AT VALYANETHU HOUSE, ANGADI MURI, ANGADI VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.
2 SAJI P. THOMAS, AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O. THOMAS, RESIDING AT KADIYAMKUNNIL HOUSE, ANGADI MURI, ANGADI VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.
3 P.T.VARGHESE, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. CHANDY, RESIDING AT VALYANETHU HOUSE, ANGADI MURI, ANGADI VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a decree for mandatory injunction for restoration of property could be passed without a survey plan identifying boundaries.
Whether the findings of fact regarding the existence of a way and refusal of prescriptive easement should be disturbed in second appeal.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Varghese Chandy, Saji P. Thomas, P.T. Vargheше
- appellant
Shaji, Varghese, Saji, Vargheше, Saji
- respondent
Sunny Jacob
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court