Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 1336/2019

Case between Ramankutty vs Mary Antony et al regarding civil procedure

Court
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2025-08-27
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Ramankutty and Shobana are the plaintiffs, while Mary Antony and others are the defendants. The case involved a mediation report and a compromise agreement which was agreed upon by both parties.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit was decreed in terms of the compromise agreement reached by both parties. The mediation report was found lawful and not opposed to public policy.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed in terms of the compromise agreement reached by both parties. The mediation report was found lawful and not opposed to public policy.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Terms of the compromise agreement found lawful and not opposed to public policy.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, Suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Ramankutty
Party Age
68
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Shobana
Party Age
59
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mary Antony
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mathew Antony
Party Age
57
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Babu K.A
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Joy K.A
Party Age
51
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Lissy George
Party Age
54
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.S.Unnikrishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Veena C.V
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Aneesh K.R
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anil S Raj
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anila Peter
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Radhika Rajasekharan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.
Evidence:
Hence, Suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Mediation Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The court reviewed the mediation report and the compromise agreement, which were found lawful.
Reference:

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 Ramankutty vs Mary Antony et al regarding civil procedure
Case Code Year
Case between Ramankutty vs Mary Antony et al regarding civil procedure

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 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