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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No. 594/2011

Case between Thomas Mannully et al vs Abdul Jaleel et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi. K. Dinamany
Order Date
2024-12-11
Duration
approximately-13 years 5 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This case involves a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction filed by Thomas Mannully and others against Abdul Jaleel and others. The plaintiff seeks to restrain the defendants from alienating the plaint schedule property after an agreement for sale made in 2008.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit for permanent prohibitory injunction as the plaintiff failed to prove a prima facie case. The plaintiff's claims were found to be lacking since the previous agreement for sale had expired and allegations of the defendants' actions were not substantiated.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for the injunction sought.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Yash Thomas Mannully (Age not specified years) Mannully House, Mannully Road, Elamkulam Village, Kanayanoor Taluk, Ernakulam- 682020 Nishy Thomas Mannully (Age not specified years) Mannully House, Mannully Road, Elamkulam Village, Kanayanoor Taluk, Ernakulam- 682020 Sheethal Thomas (Age not specified years) Mannully House, Mannully Road, Elamkulam Village, Kanayanoor Taluk, Ernakulam- 682020 Chanchal Thomas (Age not specified years) Mannully House, Mannully Road, Elamkulam Village, Kanayanoor Taluk, Ernakulam- 682020 Philomina Thomas (Age not specified years) Mannully House, Mannully Road, Elamkulam Village, Kanayanoor Taluk, Ernakulam- 682020

Defendants

Abdul Jaleel (59 years) Sumi Mercantile Co. (P) Ltd., House No. 39/5866(A), Parambithra Cross Road, Panampilly Nagar, Cochin- 682036 Nazeer (57 years) Sumi Mercantile Co. (P) Ltd., House No. 39/5866(A), Parambithra Cross Road, Panampilly Nagar, Cochin- 682036 K Venugopal (58 years) Flat 3B, J M Buildings, Palarivatam Desom, Edapally South Village, Kanayannur Taluk Robin Roy @ Robin Antony Roy (33 years) Attipetty House, Kaloor Desam, Elamkulam Village, Kanayannoor Taluk, Cochin- 682017

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from alienating the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
The suit is dismissed with costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Contract to Sell plaint schedule property
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referred to as the initial agreement for the sale of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Agreement regarding Sale of plaint schedule property
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was noted to have replaced Ext.A1 and indicates the terms agreed upon for the sale.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Copy of Sale deed no. 1441/97 of SRO, Kaduthuruthy
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was mentioned but its relevance was not detailed in the judgment.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Lawyer notice issued by the defendants
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced concerning the defendants' communication related to the agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Copy of Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was noted but specifics of its relevance were not detailed.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Lawyer notice issued by the defendants
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was part of the correspondence concerning the agreement's terms.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Copy of legal notice sent by the plaintiff
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced regarding the plaintiff's formal communication with the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was part of the evidence demonstrating the notice sent by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Returned acknowledgment card signed by D1
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicated that the first defendant received the notice.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Returned acknowledgment card signed by D2
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicated that the second defendant received the notice.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Returned acknowledgment card signed by D3
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicated that the third defendant received the notice.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: Returned Registered Cover
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced in relation to the notices sent to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type: Copy of certified copy of judgment in OS No. 109/15 of Hon’ble Principal Sub Judge, Kottayam
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was mentioned but its relevance to the case at hand was not detailed.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: Copy of certified copy of award passed in OS 109/15 in Lok Adalath
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates related proceedings but its relevance to this suit is unclear.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: Relevant page of news paper containing news about D1
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was mentioned but specifics of its relevance were not detailed.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type: Certified copy of Order in Bail application No. 7278/2011 of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was mentioned but its relevance to the current case was not explained.
Reference:
Ext.A16

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Sat, 07/02/2011 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases