Case Summary
The petitioners Anoop K T and K S Rajan filed for a temporary injunction against the defendant Tomy. The court granted the injunction to prevent any work that could damage the property in question.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Ad interim injunction granted.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court issued an ad interim injunction preventing the defendant from performing any work that may damage the property in dispute.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Prima facie case has been made out and delay in notice would defeat the purpose of the application.
Prima facie case has been made out and delay in notice would defeat the purpose of the application.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Prima facie case has been made out and delay in notice would defeat the purpose of the application.
Prima facie case has been made out and delay in notice would defeat the purpose of the application.
Supporting Evidence
I am satisfied that prima facie case has been made out and if notice issued delay will occurred which will defeat the very purpose of the above application.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence, an ad interim injunction is granted restraining the counter petitioner and people under him from doing any work in the plaint schedule item no. 2 property such as to cause damage to the plaint schedule item no. 3 retaining wall until further orders.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Anoop K T
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- K S Rajan
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Tomy
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M C Scariah
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Biju Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
An ad interim injunction is granted restraining the counter petitioner and people under him from doing any work in the plaint schedule item no. 2 property such as to cause damage to the plaint schedule item no. 3 retaining wall until further orders.
Evidence:
Hence, an ad interim injunction is granted restraining the counter petitioner and people under him from doing any work in the plaint schedule item no. 2 property such as to cause damage to the plaint schedule item no. 3 retaining wall until further orders.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2025