Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 522 /20 25

Case between Jose Varghese vs Koruthu Varghese et al regarding temporary injunction

Court
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany
Order Date
2025-07-11
Duration
approximately-2 years 2 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Jose Varghese is seeking a temporary injunction against Koruthu Varghese and others regarding a cardamom estate in Munnar, alleging they intend to sell the property despite an agreement. The case revolves around the validity of the sale agreement and investment made by the plaintiff.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the plaintiff's petition, granting a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the property in question.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary injunction restraining defendants from alienating the property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the plaintiff's petition, granting a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the property in question.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established a prima-facie case and the balance of convenience favored him.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established a prima-facie case and the balance of convenience favored him.
Supporting Evidence
The court found merit in the petitioner’s contention that the substance of the document, and not merely its title, must be considered. The time period for performance is four years, within which the petitioner is to pay the sale consideration.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed. Defendants are restrained by temporary order of injunction from alienating, encumbering, committing waste or putting third parties into possession of plaint schedule property in violation of the agreement for sale dated 05.05.2023 entered into between the plaintiff and defendants.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Jose Varghese
Party Age
53
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Koruthu Varghese
Party Age
48
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Dr. Sushila Varghese
Party Age
73
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Suzanna Varghese
Party Age
39
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of the agreement for Sale (Memorandum of Understanding) executed on 13.07.2023, Copy of the agreement for Lease (Rental agreement) executed on 13.07.2023
Defendants Documents
Copy of lawyer’s notice

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Alias M Cherian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Minnu Darwin
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Bristo S Pariyaram
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Reshma Rajesh
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
N K Subramanian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Abraham Mathen
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Temporary injunction restraining defendants from alienating the property.
Evidence:
Defendants are restrained by temporary order of injunction from alienating, encumbering, committing waste or putting third parties into possession of plaint schedule property in violation of the agreement for sale dated 05.05.2023.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Memorandum of Understanding
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed on 13.07.2023, it outlines the agreement for sale for the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lease Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed on 13.07.2023, it provides the legal framework for the plaintiff's possession for eco-tourism.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides proof of transactions related to the lease agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides proof of transactions related to the lease agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Acknowledgment of Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of payment receipt acknowledged by the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Notice demanding arrears of rent which reflects the defendants' position.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Serves as evidence of receipt relevant to the defendants' claims.
Reference:
Ext.B2

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Jose Varghese vs Koruthu Varghese et al regarding temporary injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Jose Varghese vs Koruthu Varghese et al regarding temporary injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Fri, 05/05/2023 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won