Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS 178/2025

Case between Saina Joy, Joy Markose vs Jeo George regarding obstruction to the user of bathroom/toilet.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Judge
Smt. Jyothi Babu R.
Order Date
2025-10-25
Duration
Case Code No.
178
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Saina Joy and Joy Markose are the plaintiffs, and Jeo George is the defendant in this case. The plaintiffs filed a petition to restrain the defendant from obstructing their use of the common bathroom as provided in a sale deed.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from obstructing the use of the bathroom as outlined in the sale deed.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The respondents are restrained from causing obstructions to the user of the bathroom/toilet as provided in sale deed no. 2207/21.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from obstructing the use of the bathroom as outlined in the sale deed.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner established that they have the right to use the common bathroom as per the sale deed.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioner established that they have the right to use the common bathroom as per the sale deed.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner could establish that the petitioner has right to use the common bathroom/ toilet.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the respondents are restrained from causing obstructions to the user of the bathroom/ toilet as provided in sale deed no. 2207/21.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Saina Joy
Party Age
54
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Joy Markose
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jeo George
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Sale deed no. 2207/21.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Binoy Abraham
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Dimple Raj
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restraint on respondents from causing obstructions to the user of the bathroom/toilet.
Evidence:
Hence it can be held that the petitioner is entitled to the relief as claimed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of sale deed no. 2207/21, establishing right to use the common bathroom.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Commissioner Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Report and plan prepared by the Advocate Commissioner regarding the common bathroom.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2025

Quick Facts

Location
Kottayam District
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between R Ramachandran Nair et al vs Sivasankarapanicker et al regarding ad interim injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between Divya R Nair vs Deepthy R Nair et al regarding injunction
Court of the Munsiff, Kottayam
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between Saina Joy et al vs Jeo George regarding obstruction to the use of bathroom/toilet.
Court of the Munsiff, Kottayam
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between Kumarakom Sreekumaramangalam Devaswayogam et al vs K P Anandhakuttan regarding ad interim injunction.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between Pathorse vs Ambily M B et al regarding injunction against trespassing and demolition.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Injunction Defendant Won