Case Summary
The plaintiffs, represented by their attorney, are seeking to declare certain agreements as fraudulent and null, claiming unauthorized possession and compensation from the defendants. The defendants contend that the plaintiffs' claims are unsupported and that there was a valid joint venture agreement for the property in question.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for injunction filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed. The court found that the plaintiffs did not make a prima facie case for the relief sought.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that they had a clear entitlement to the relief of injunction.
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that they had a clear entitlement to the relief of injunction.
Why Defendant Won:
The petitioners have not approached the court with clean hands and suppressed material facts.
The petitioners have not approached the court with clean hands and suppressed material facts.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioners have not made out a prima facie case for grant of the discretionary relief of interim injunction in their favour.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Samson T George
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Babu Mathew
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Santhosh Kumar
- Party Age
- 51
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Arun Kumar K
- Party Age
- 59
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Official Liquidator, MIR Realtors Pvt. Ltd
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney executed by the 1st plaintiff, Power of Attorney executed by the 2nd plaintiff, Various Sale and Construction Agreements.
Defendants Documents
Joint Venture Agreement executed by the plaintiffs and MIR Realtors Pvt. Ltd.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C S Manu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dilu Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C A Anupaman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- T B Sivaprasad
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C Y Vijaykumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manju E R
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Neethu K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anandhu Satheesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Alint Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Paul Jose
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Dainy Davis
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Enoch David Simon Joel
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- S Sreedev
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Rony Jose
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Leo Lukose
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Karol Mathews
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Derick Mathai Saji
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Karan Scaria Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Ittoop Joy Thattil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Abraham Mathew(Vettoor)
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Anil Abey Jose(Vettoor)
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Maggie V Mathunny
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Ashwin
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Temporary Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Requested temporary prohibitory injunction against the 1st respondent from alienating or encumbering the Q schedule property.
Evidence:
This court is of the opinion that the petitioner have not made out a prima facie case for grant of the discretionary relief of interim injunction in their favour.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Seeking declaration that the forged agreement of sale and construction agreement are null, void, and fraudulent.
Evidence:
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Directing the 1st respondent to hand over possession of the Q schedule property.
Evidence:
Relief Type:
Damages
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Claim for compensation for unauthorized occupation.
Evidence:
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed by the 1st plaintiff in favour of Alex Joseph.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed by the 2nd plaintiff in favour of Alex Joseph.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Sale Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to the sale agreement for the Q schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Construction Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to the construction agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photostat copy of the document no. 2319 of 1995 of SRO, Thrikkakara.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photostat copy of the document no. 2306 of 1995 of SRO, Thrikkakara.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photostat copy of the document no. 2348 of 1995 of SRO, Thrikkakara.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True photostat copy of the document no. 2797 of 2006 of SRO, Thrikkakara.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Municipality Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photostat copy of the notice issued by the Thrikkakara Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Email sent by P T Joy regarding the Joint Venture Agreement produced by MIR Realities Pvt. Ltd.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Court Order
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Order in W A No. 306 of 2025 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Document No. 874 of 2009 of SRO, Thrikkakkara.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Document No. 1020 of 2009 of SRO, Thrikkakkara.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Document No. 509 of 2010 of SRO, Thrikkakkara.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type:
SRO Document
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Document No. 1372 of 2010 of SRO, Thrikkakkara.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type:
Permission Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Permission Certificate issued by the Thrikkakara Gram Panchayat in favor of Samson T George, Thomas George and Philip P John.
Reference:
Ext.A16
Document Type:
Permission Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Permission Certificate issued by the Thrikkakara Gram Panchayat to Samson T George, Babu Mathew, Philip P John.
Reference:
Ext.A17
Document Type:
Building Permit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Building Permit issued by the Thrikkakara Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.A18
Document Type:
Municipality Order
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Order issued by Thrikkakkara Municipality.
Reference:
Ext.A19
Document Type:
No Objection Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the No Objection Certificate issued by the Airport Authority of India.
Reference:
Ext.A20
Document Type:
Writ Petition
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the Writ Petition filed by the Plaintiffs before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala.
Reference:
Ext.A21
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 Samson T George et al vs Santhosh Kumar et al regarding declaration of forged agreements and injunction relief
Case Code Year
Case between Samson T George et al vs Santhosh Kumar et al regarding declaration of forged agreements and injunction relief