Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 37 / 2023

Case between Bindu Pathrose vs The South Indian Bank Ltd. et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF KOLENCHERY
Judge
Smt. Sirsha.N.A
Order Date
2024-01-31
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioner, Bindu Pathrose, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against The South Indian Bank Ltd. and its Authorized Officer to prevent eviction from her agricultural property. The bank claims it is taking legal steps for loan recovery, which the petitioner contests.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The application for a temporary injunction filed by Bindu Pathrose was dismissed, as the court found that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The application for a temporary injunction filed by Bindu Pathrose was dismissed, as the court found that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner did not substantiate claims of being deprived of any legal rights regarding the property.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
the petitioner / plaintiff approached before the court by suppressing the material facts.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result: This application is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Bindu Pathrose
Party Age
50
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The South Indian Bank Ltd.
Relation
Rep. by its Branch Manager
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Authorized Officer, The South Indian Bank Ltd.
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Hybin Jose
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Charles Devassy
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Mathew P.Paul
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The petitioner / plaintiff sought a temporary injunction restraining the respondent / defendant bank from causing any obstruction to the peaceful residence in the house situated at plaint schedule property which is an agricultural property.
Evidence:
Here, the petitioner / plaintiff has sought for a temporary injunction restraining the respondent / defendant bank from causing any obstruction to the peaceful residence in the house situated at plaint schedule property which is an agricultural property.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Bindu Pathrose vs The South Indian Bank Ltd. et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Bindu Pathrose vs The South Indian Bank Ltd. et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 01/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Wed, 01/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India vs Radhika Haridas et al regarding dismissal of suit
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Canara Bank vs M/s Leona Bags et al regarding realization of money
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Mohammed Ashique T K regarding recovery of loan
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between UNION BANK OF INDIA vs PREETHA MOHAN regarding attachment of movables
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Union Bank of India vs M/s Eleonore regarding realization of money
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won