Case Summary
The plaintiff, Girish K. R., seeks an injunction against the defendants to prevent his eviction from a property he claims to have rented. The defendants, including State Bank of India officials, assert that the suit is barred under the SARFAESI Act and challenge the plaintiff's tenancy.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the suit is barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and dismissed the case. The parties were directed to bear their respective costs.
Key Reasoning:
The suit was dismissed as it was found to be barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
The suit was dismissed as it was found to be barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
Why Defendant Won:
The suit was dismissed as it was found to be barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
The suit was dismissed as it was found to be barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.
Supporting Evidence
The bar under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act is evident only upon consideration of the rival pleadings in the case at hand.
Judgment Evidence:
The suit is therefore dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Girish K. R.
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thomas J. Vayalatt
- Party Age
- 63
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chief Manager, State Bank of India
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Authorized Officer, State Bank of India
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- T.S Santhosh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Babykuttan K. C
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ajay N.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Jaya D
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Archana Asokan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Thomas T. Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Achu Shubha Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Rineesha Rajkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Neha Susan Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Kallayni G. Menon
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a decree of injunction restraining the defendants from forcefully evicting him from the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
the relief that is sought for in the suit at hand is to pass a decree of injunction as against the defendants, restraining them from forcefully evicting the plaintiff from the plaint schedule property otherwise than by due process of law as envisaged under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Injunction
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Girish K. R. vs Thomas J. Vayalatt et al regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Girish K. R. vs Thomas J. Vayalatt et al regarding injunction