Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No. 120/2021

Case between Mohanlal et al vs Sheena et al regarding Fixation of Boundary and Injunction.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM.
Judge
Smt. Ragi.S.
Order Date
2025-08-27
Duration
approximately-4 years 21 days
Case Code No.
120
Case Closed
Wed, 08/27/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves plaintiffs Mohanlal, Yamunabhai, Gangabhai, and Sindhubai filing a suit for the fixation of boundary and injunction against defendants Sheena, Varun, and Kiran. The plaintiffs were absent during the hearing, which led to the dismissal of the suit for non-prosecution.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The plaintiff was continuously absent during the hearings, resulting in the suit being dismissed for non-prosecution.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaintiff was continuously absent during the hearings, resulting in the suit being dismissed for non-prosecution.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs were continuously absent.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs were continuously absent.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff is continuously absent.

Judgment Evidence:

Since the plaintiff is continuously absent, the suit is dismissed for non prosecution.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mohanlal
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Yamunabhai
Party Age
59
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Gangabhai
Party Age
57
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sindhubai
Party Age
45
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sheena
Party Age
56
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Varun
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kiran
Party Age
37
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
R.Aji
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sabitha G.Nath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
G.S.Krishna Kumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Pintu.V.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The suit is dismissed for non prosecution.
Evidence:
Since the plaintiff is continuously absent, the suit is dismissed for non prosecution.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2021

Quick Facts

Location
Kollam
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Case Filed
Fri, 08/06/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
Wed, 08/27/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Satheesh et al vs Ajayan regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Babu Chandhar et al vs Sarada Chandhatty et al regarding Partition.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Parukutti Amma et al vs Abdul Rahim regarding restoration of suit.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Piyoos vs Sheemol regarding setting aside the order in RP.No.259/2024
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sajeev vs T.Unnikrishna Pillai regarding setting aside an exparte decree.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won