Case Summary
Chandramathi and Geetha are the plaintiffs alleging that Krishanakumar, the defendant, violated an interim injunction order. The court heard the petition regarding this matter and assessed the evidence.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court recognized the respondent's admission of violating the interim injunction and allowed the petition.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The violation of the interim injunction was admitted by the defendant.
The violation of the interim injunction was admitted by the defendant.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It was alleged that the respondent has violated the interim injunction order of the court. The above fact was admitted by DW1 during cross examination.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence this petition can be considered at the time of hearing of the suit.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Chandramathi
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Geetha
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Krishanakumar
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ramanathan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- R Jaya
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Santhosh Kesavanath P
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Unknown
Description:
Petition for prosecution due to violation of interim injunction order
Evidence:
It was alleged that the respondent has violated the interim injunction order of the court.
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
2022