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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 506/2025

Case between Girish K. R. vs Thomas J. Vayalatt et al regarding injunction

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-12-08
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

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

Defendant Won
Interim Order
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.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The suit was dismissed as it was found to be barred under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit is therefore dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Girish K. R. (53 years years) Gauri Nandanam, Kalavoor P.O., Alappuzha, currently residing at Kochi Corporation, Door No. 66/3565, 8ᵗʰ Floor, Island Castle, Karithala, Ernakulam Village, Kanayannur Taluk.

Defendants

Thomas J. Vayalatt (63 years years) Vayalatt House, 6/419 A, V T J Enclave, Maradu P.O, Maradu Kara, Maradu Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District Pin - 682 304. Chief Manager, State Bank of India (Age not specified years) S. M. E. Vyttila, 2ⁿᵈ Floor Shyama Business Hub, Ernakulam District 682 019. Authorized Officer, State Bank of India (Age not specified years) S. M. E. Vyttila, 2ⁿᵈ Floor Shyama Business Hub, Ernakulam District 682 019.

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

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Fri, 06/15/2018 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases