Case between Faisal S.H. vs Abdul Hameed et al regarding temporary prohibitory injunction.

Case Summary

Faisal S.H. has filed for a temporary prohibitory injunction against Abdul Hameed and others, seeking to prevent them from forcefully evicting him from a property he rented. The plaintiff claims he has met all lease obligations but faces eviction contrary to their agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won

Interim Order

The court extended the ad-interim order against forceful eviction until a stipulated date, demanding the petitioner to comply with directives to pay arrears of rent. Failure to comply could result in the termination of the injunction.

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Ad-interim order granted is extended till 03.11.2025.

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

No

The court extended the ad-interim order against forceful eviction until a stipulated date, demanding the petitioner to comply with directives to pay arrears of rent. Failure to comply could result in the termination of the injunction.

Key Reasoning:
The court found that the petitioner did not demonstrate a prima facie case or balance of convenience due to the non-payment of rent.

Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the petitioner did not demonstrate a prima facie case or balance of convenience due to the non-payment of rent.

Supporting Evidence

Invariably, if the petitioner is evicted otherwise than by due process of law, from a building that is located within an area to which the provisions of the Kerala Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act, it will give rise to a situation where there is a possibility of irreparable injury to the petitioner.

Judgment Evidence:

Ad-interim order granted is extended till 03.11.2025. The ad interim order granted will stand affirmed subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay arrears of rent, or deposit the same before the court.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Faisal S.H.
Party Age: 34
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Abdul Hameed
Party Age: 83
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: V.K. Fathima
Party Age: 74
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Abdul Jaleel
Party Age: 55
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Abdul razak
Party Age: 53
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Abdul Shukoor
Party Age: 48
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Minimol K.M
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Babu Karukapadath
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: M.A Vaheeda Babu
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Arya Raghunath
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Wazim Babu Karukapadath
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: P. Lakshmi
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Aysha E.M
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Hashim K.M
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Abuasil A.K
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Rishi Vincent
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: M.I Insaf Mooppan
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Temporary Injunction

Outcome: Partly Granted

Description:

The petitioner sought a temporary prohibitory injunction to restrain the respondents from forcefully dispossessing the plaintiff from the plaint schedule property.

Evidence:

The ad-interim order granted is extended till 03.11.2025.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification