Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 242 /2023

Case between Alice Chacko vs Rolin Sunil et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
II Additional Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi. K. Dinamany.
Order Date
2024-07-31
Duration
approximately-1 year 1 month
Case Closed
Wed, 07/31/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Alice Chacko, is suing for a permanent prohibitory injunction against Rolin Sunil and others concerning property rights. The case revolves around claims of harassment and property possession after the death of the plaintiff's husband.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the defendants and dismissed the suit. The plaintiff failed to prove her claims regarding possession of the disputed property.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the defendants and dismissed the suit. The plaintiff failed to prove her claims regarding possession of the disputed property.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to support her claims of possession and ownership.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to support her claims of possession and ownership.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has not disputed the title of the plaint schedule property nor claimed that she has right of ownership over plaint schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Alice Chacko
Party Age
64
Relation
W/o (late) Y. Chacko
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rolin Sunil
Party Age
43
Relation
W/o (late) Sunil
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sandra Sunil
Party Age
22
Relation
D/o (late) Sunil
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Saniya Sunil
Party Age
15
Relation
(Minor)
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of order of Maintenance Tribunal, Fort Kochi, Copy of Marriage Certificate plaintiff, Copy of death certificate of Y. Chacko, Copy of certified copy of the settlement deed No.3263/12 of Maradu SRO, Copy of lawyer notice issued to 1st defendant, Postal receipt.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Babu Cherukara
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Kirosh Rajan Ponnambil
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Jasmin.T.K
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Manju Paul
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff requested a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants regarding the property.
Evidence:
Hence from the above discussion this court is satisfied that the plaintiff has not proved the case. Hence plaintiff is not entitled to the reliefs claimed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Copy of order of Maintenance Tribunal
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document demonstrates the plaintiff's claim for maintenance and the conditions under which the defendants must provide it.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of Marriage Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the plaintiff's marital status, supporting her claims.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Copy of Death Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the death of Y. Chacko, which is central to the plaintiff's claims.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Copy of certified copy of the settlement deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the formal transfer of property rights from Y. Chacko, which is crucial to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Copy of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates the plaintiff's communication with the defendants regarding her demands.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides evidence of the notice sent by the plaintiff to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A6

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Alice Chacko vs Rolin Sunil et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Alice Chacko vs Rolin Sunil et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
Wed, 07/31/2024 - 12:00
From
Mon, 07/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Wed, 07/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won