Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS 626/2021

Case between Lillykutty Thomas vs M/s CRI Rubbers et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
Prl.Munsiff's Court
Judge
Smt. Jyothi Babu R.
Order Date
2025-08-26
Duration
approximately-4 years 3 months
Case Code No.
626
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Lillykutty Thomas filing a suit against M/s CRI Rubbers and its partners, Jacob Thomas and Aby Jacob, to prevent them from taking away assets without settling bank debts. The court dismissed the petition for variation of an earlier injunction order.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the petition filed by the defendants to vary the injunction order due to a lack of sufficient grounds given the pending appeal.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition filed by the defendants to vary the injunction order due to a lack of sufficient grounds given the pending appeal.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
The petition was dismissed as the trial court was precluded from varying the injunction order pending an appeal.
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, petition is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Lillykutty Thomas
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s CRI Rubbers
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jacob Thomas
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Aby Jacob
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Ext. C1, order of the Appellate Court in CMA 20/22.

Advocates

Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Eldo Jacob Philip
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sony Sebastian
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Joy Joseph
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Simren Parel
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Rayin K R
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The respondent prayed to dismiss the petition for variation of the order of injunction.
Evidence:
In the above circumstances the prayer in the petition cannot be allowed at this stage.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Order
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Marked from the side of the petitioner for the purpose of reference.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2021

Quick Facts

Location
Kottayam
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Case Filed
Thu, 05/20/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between State Bank of India vs Nishana K C regarding decree of suit
Munsiff Court/Judicial First Class Magistrate -IV, Kottayam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Asset Sapphire Apartment Owners Association vs Amal Shaji et al regarding petition for document production
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Aniyamma Joseph et al vs Akhil Joseph et al regarding civil matters.
Munsiff Court/ Judicial First Class Magistrate -IV, Kottayam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ajitha Jibi vs Sherin Mathew et al regarding compromise petition.
Munsiff Court/ Judicial First Class Magistrate -IV, Kottayam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Surendran et al vs Daniel. K.P. et al regarding partition of property.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won