Case Summary
C.M. Subair, a tenant running a jewelry business, is seeking a perpetual prohibitory injunction against his landlords, Salam and others, to prevent them from evicting him without due process. The plaintiff claims that he is being wrongfully threatened with eviction despite paying rent regularly.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, granting him a permanent prohibitory injunction. The defendants are restrained from evicting the plaintiff without due process.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established his possession over the property and demonstrated that eviction attempts by the defendants contravened the legal requirements under lease law.
The plaintiff established his possession over the property and demonstrated that eviction attempts by the defendants contravened the legal requirements under lease law.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established his possession over the property and demonstrated that eviction attempts by the defendants contravened the legal requirements under lease law.
The plaintiff established his possession over the property and demonstrated that eviction attempts by the defendants contravened the legal requirements under lease law.
Supporting Evidence
It is evident defendants have no case that the plaintiff is not in possession of the plaint schedule property. The plaintiff has, in his pleadings and in his evidence..., clearly put forward a case that the plaintiff is in possession of the plaint schedule property and is still in possession of the same.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the defendants are restrained by way of a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants, their men and agents and representatives from evicting the plaintiffs from the plaint A schedule building by using any form of physical force, otherwise than under due process of law.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- C.M. Subair
- Party Age
- 58
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Salam
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Saly
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sakeer
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sameer
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of the acknowledgment (4 Nos.) of NEFT Applications issued by Bandhan Bank, Edappally; True Photostat copy of the letter 16.11.2023; True Photostat copy of the letter 27.11.2023; True Photostat copy of the letter 27.11.2023
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.G Cleetus
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Peterlal Murimattom
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Joby Jacob Pulickekudy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Ancy T
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Fathima Sulfath N.B
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Dajish John
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from evicting the plaintiff without due process.
Evidence:
The defendants are restrained by way of a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants, their men and agents and representatives from evicting the plaintiffs from the plaint A schedule building by using any form of physical force, otherwise than under due process of law.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certified copy of the acknowledgement of NEFT Applications
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to support the plaintiff's claim of regular rent payments.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
True Photostat copy of the letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted as part of the plaintiff's evidence.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
True Photostat copy of the letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted as part of the plaintiff's evidence.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
True Photostat copy of the letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted as part of the plaintiff's evidence.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between C.M. Subair vs Salam et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between C.M. Subair vs Salam et al regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act