Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 1075/2024

Case between Bava Realtors Private Limited vs Cicil K Peter et al regarding construction disputes.

Court
The Court of the Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2025-04-04
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Bava Realtors Private Limited and its Managing Director Muhammed Nazarudeen are petitioners against Cicil K Peter, Peter K.P, and others regarding a temporary prohibitory injunction due to alleged interference with construction work. The case involves disputes over property development and contractual obligations.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The petition for a temporary prohibitory injunction was dismissed as the petitioners, Bava Realtors Private Limited and Muhammed Nazarudeen, failed to establish a prima facie case or satisfy the balance of convenience. The court found no grounds for granting the injunction sought against the respondents.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for a temporary prohibitory injunction was dismissed as the petitioners, Bava Realtors Private Limited and Muhammed Nazarudeen, failed to establish a prima facie case or satisfy the balance of convenience. The court found no grounds for granting the injunction sought against the respondents.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioners did not substantiate their claims regarding the maintenance of contractual obligations and possession of the property.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The petitioners have not produced the original document and failed to demonstrate that they possess any rights beyond a mere license to develop the property.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Bava Realtors Private Limited
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Muhammed Nazarudeen
Party Age
35
Relation
S/o Bava Muhammed
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Cicil K Peter
Party Age
56
Relation
S/o Peter K.P
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Peter K.P
Party Age
86
Relation
S/o Paulose
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Abdhu P.M
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Level Hundred
Relation
represented by its Director Vilas Thomas
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Eldho George
Party Age
50
Relation
S/o George Varghese
Plaintiffs Documents
True copy of the sale agreement dated 17.01.2022, True copy of construction agreements, Various documents relating to expenses and communication.
Defendants Documents
Photocopy of sale agreement marked as Exhibit B1.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Lal K Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P.Muraleedharan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Luxy T.A
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Suresh Sukumar
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Anzil Salim
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Akash George
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sanjay Sellen
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sonia Shibu
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Aamina Rafeek
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Adithya S Puthezhathu
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Rajesh Sivaramankutty
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Arul Muralidharan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sayed Ebrahim M
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The petitioners requested a temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain the respondents from obstructing the construction work.
Evidence:
The petition is dismissed.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Construction Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the construction agreement executed between the Ist Plaintiff and Sanjith and Manjusha.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Construction Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the construction agreement executed between the Ist Plaintiff and Sherin Rajan.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Construction Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the construction agreement executed between the Ist Plaintiff and R. .Vijay Krishnan and Remya Krishnan.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Construction Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the construction agreement executed between the Ist Plaintiff and Aravind R and Surabhi Patodia.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Sale Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copies of sale deeds executed by respondents 1 and 2 in favor of the customers.
Reference:
Ext.A1 to Ext.A4
Document Type: Valuation Report
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the detailed valuation report of the Schedule properties.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the account statement of the Ist Plaintiff from 18.05.23 to 19.10.24 issued by the CSB Bank Ltd., Thrikkakkara branch.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Photographs
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photographs of the schedule properties (8 nos).
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the account statement of M/s BR Homes Private Ltd. from 29.11.23 to 07.03.25 issued by CSB Bank Ltd, Ponnurunny branch.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type: Whatsapp Communication
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Extract of the Whatsapp communication between the plaintiff and Sherin (Villa owner).
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: Police Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the receipt issued by Info park Police Station.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: Sale Agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Sale agreement dated 17.01.22 between the petitioners and the 5th respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B1

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 Bava Realtors Private Limited vs Cicil K Peter et al regarding construction disputes.
Case Code Year
Case between Bava Realtors Private Limited vs Cicil K Peter et al regarding construction disputes.

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 04/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

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