Case Summary
The plaintiff, Ansar, filed a suit for a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants, Geethakumari and Radhakrishna Pillai. The plaintiff's counsel later submitted that they were not pressing the suit.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff's counsel, who indicated that the plaintiff was not pursuing the case further.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Hence suit dismissed as not pressed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ansar
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Geethakumari
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Radhakrishna Pillai
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- H/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Ajay Koivila
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.S.Nisha Babu
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R.Geetha
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sreelatha.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Fathima Siraj
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Permanent Injunction
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction was requested by the plaintiff.
Evidence:
Counsel submitted not pressing the suit.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2025