Case Summary
This case involves a petition filed by the defendants for allowing a joint trial alongside another suit, O.S. 268/2019. The plaintiff, Sushama, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for joint trial was dismissed as the trial had already commenced. Both parties are to bear their own costs.
Key Reasoning:
The trial of the suit has already begun, and the petitioners did not take necessary pre-trial steps.
The trial of the suit has already begun, and the petitioners did not take necessary pre-trial steps.
Why Defendant Won:
The trial of the suit has already begun, and the petitioners did not take necessary pre-trial steps.
The trial of the suit has already begun, and the petitioners did not take necessary pre-trial steps.
Supporting Evidence
This court find force in the argument of the learned counsel for the respondent. So point no.1 is found against the petitioners and found in favour of the respondent.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sushama
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Suseela
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Manju
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Vakkom Lali Sunil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. S. Sunil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Niji. S.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Joint trial of this suit along with O.S. 268/2019
Evidence:
this court is of the view that the present petition can’t be allowed
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Costs for each party
Evidence:
both parties can be directed to suffer their respective costs
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Exhibit
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Relevant evidence in the ongoing trial
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Exhibit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence provided by the plaintiff in support of the claim
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Exhibit
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Additional evidence provided by the plaintiff
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Testimony of the plaintiff
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sushama vs Suseela et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Case Code Year
Case between Sushama vs Suseela et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.