Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No . 168/2023

Case between C.Vijayamohanan vs CSB Bank Ltd. et al regarding mandatory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-06-27
Duration
approximately-4 years

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

C. Vijayamohanan, a former employee of CSB Bank Ltd., filed this suit after being prematurely retired. He alleges violations of pension regulations and seeks mandatory injunctions for pension adjustments.

Judgment Outcome

Partial Relief
Interim Order
The court found that it has territorial jurisdiction to hear the case, but concluded that the suit was not properly valued.
Judgment Favored
Partial
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The court determined that the case had sufficient grounds for jurisdiction based on the plaintiff's employment location.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, The Issue No. I is found in favour of the plaintiff. The Issue No. II is found as against the plaintiff.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

C.Vijayamohanan (59 years years) Deepam, House No.91, Vidyanagar, Kalamassery, CUSAT P.O.

Defendants

CSB Bank Ltd. (Age not specified years) Registered Office, CSB Bhavan, St. Mary's College Road, Thrissur- 680 020 The Head-HR, CSB Bank Ltd. (Age not specified years) HR Department, Rani Seethai Hall, 2nd Floor, Near Gemini Fly Over, Anna Salai, Tamil Nadu - 600 006 CSB Bank Ltd. (Age not specified years) Kalamassery, Thadathil Towers, Metro Pillar No. 301/302, South Kalamassery, CUSAT P.O., Ernakulam District, Kerala State, PIN: 682 022 Reserve Bank of India (Age not specified years) Main Building, P.O. Box 901, Shahid Bhagat Singh Road, Mumbai - 400 001 BSR & Co. LLP (Age not specified years) 14th Floor, Central B Wing and North C Wing, Nesco IT Park 4, Nesco Center, Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai- 400 063

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Partly Granted
Description:
Directing defendants-1 & 2 to pay the difference in commuted value of pension and the revised pension w.e.f. 01/06/2021.
Evidence:
This court may be pleased to pass a decree of mandatory injunction directing defendants-1 & 2 to pay the difference in commuted value of pension and the revised pension w.e.f. 01/06/2021 by taking into account the qualifying service as 33 years and also taking into account the Special Allowance component of the salary for arriving at the amount of basic pension.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Partly Granted
Description:
Directing the 4th defendant to ensure that defendants-1 & 2 meet their commitments under the Service Regulations.
Evidence:
This court may be pleased to pass a decree of mandatory injunction directing 4th defendant to ensure that the defendants-1 & 2 are meeting their commitments under the Service Regulations by paying the difference in commuted value of pension and the revised pension to the plaintiff w.e.f. 01/06/2021.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Partly Granted
Description:
Directing defendants-5 & 6 to ensure compliance with the Indian Accounting Standards.
Evidence:
This court may be pleased to pass a decree of mandatory injunction directing 5th & 6th defendants to ensure that the defendants-1 & 2 are meeting their obligations under the Indian Accounting Standards relating to the recognition and disclosure of their liability for the employee benefits under the defined benefit plan.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Costs of suit may be awarded.
Evidence:
Costs of suit may be awarded.

Documents & Evidence

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Mon, 05/31/2021 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases