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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 571 / 2020

Case between M/s Sinergia Media Labs LLP vs M/s Smart City (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany.
Order Date
2025-07-25
Duration
approximately-5 years 11 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, M/s Sinergia Media Labs LLP, filed a suit against the defendant, M/s Smart City (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, seeking protection against eviction and service disruption. The case revolves around alleged non-payment of rent during the COVID-19 pandemic and the plaintiff's apprehension of unlawful eviction.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from forcefully evicting the plaintiff and from discontinuing essential services. The judgment acknowledges the relationship between the parties and the legality surrounding eviction processes.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against forceful eviction and service discontinuation
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff's apprehensions of unlawful eviction were justified and that the plaintiff was entitled to remain in the premises until evicted through due process.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed on the following terms. 1) Defendant is restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from forcefully evicting the plaintiff from plaint schedule property without due process of law. 2) Defendant is restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from terminating or discontinuing any of the services which are essential for running the day to day affairs of the office/ work place of the plaintiff company.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

M/s Sinergia Media Labs LLP (Age not specified years) 25, Mather Leisureville, Rajagiri Valley, Kakkanad – 682039 Derrick Sebastian (Age not specified years) Sylvania 19A, Sky line, IVY League, Edachira, Kakkanad – 682030

Defendants

M/s Smart City (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd (Age not specified years) Smart City Pavillion Brahmapuram, P O Kochi, Kerala – 682303 CEO (Age not specified years)

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against forceful eviction.
Evidence:
Defendant is restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from forcefully evicting the plaintiff from plaint schedule property without due process of law.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff sought a permanent prohibitory injunction against the termination of essential services.
Evidence:
Defendant is restrained by a permanent prohibitory injunction from terminating or discontinuing any of the services which are essential for running the day to day affairs of the office/ work place of the plaintiff company.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Certificate of Company incorporation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the legal status of the plaintiff as a limited liability partnership.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Original Certificate under section 65B of Indian Evidence Act 1872
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document supports the admissibility of electronic records concerning the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1(a)
Document Type: Original letter of acknowledgment and acceptance of the reconstitution
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document acknowledges the changes in the structure of the plaintiff's entity.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Certified copy of the resolution
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides proof of decisions made by the plaintiff's company.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Certified copy of resolution containing the seal of the company and its directors
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as an official confirmation of the company's resolutions.
Reference:
Ext.A3(a)
Document Type: Original Sublease agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document outlines the terms under which the plaintiff occupies the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Original of the notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document captures the defendant's communication regarding the claimed waiver of rent.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: True copy of the resolution of the Board of Directors
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document demonstrates the authority and decisions made by the defendant's board.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Certified copy of the Sublease agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document relates to the sublease agreement between the plaintiff and defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B2

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam, Kerala
Case Filed
Sat, 07/25/2020 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases