Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 522 /2025

Case between Jose Varghese vs Koruthu Varghese et al regarding temporary injunction for property sale.

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, 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 sued Koruthu Varghese and others seeking a temporary injunction to prevent them from selling a cardamom estate. The plaintiff claims a valid agreement allowing him to purchase the property, while the defendants deny the existence of such an agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for a temporary injunction was allowed, preventing the defendants from selling or encumbering the property in question. The court found the plaintiff had a prima facie claim based on an alleged agreement.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating, encumbering, or committing waste on the property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for a temporary injunction was allowed, preventing the defendants from selling or encumbering the property in question. The court found the plaintiff had a prima facie claim based on an alleged agreement.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established a prima facie case for an injunction based on the alleged agreement for sale.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff established a prima facie case for an injunction based on the alleged agreement for sale.
Supporting Evidence
The Court is satisfied that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case in support of his claim. Until the expiry of that period, the petitioner has a valid cause of action to seek a prohibitory injunction.

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
Agreement for Sale (Memorandum of Understanding), Lease Agreement.
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
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Bristo S Pariyaram
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Reshma Rajesh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
N K Subramanian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Abraham Mathen
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Temporary injunction restraining the 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 agreement for sale dated 05.05.2023 allowing the plaintiff to purchase the property
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lease Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Lease agreement executed on 13.07.2023 granting the plaintiff possession of the property
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Bank statement providing evidence of financial transactions related to the case
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another bank statement relevant to the financial dealings of the plaintiff
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Receipt of Money
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment of receipt of money from the first defendant
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Legal notice sent to the plaintiff demanding arrears of rent
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Receipt relevant to the rent payment dispute
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 for property sale.
Case Code Year
Case between Jose Varghese vs Koruthu Varghese et al regarding temporary injunction for property sale.

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