Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 119/2021

Case between Sreejith N.U vs Joseph Martin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2024-07-30
Duration
approximately-3 years 9 months 29 days
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Sreejith N.U, is involved in a dispute with the defendants regarding a fitness center lease. The case is about preventing the defendants from evicting the plaintiff from the leased premises unlawfully.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed a permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiff from the fitness center without following due process of law.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction against forceful eviction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed a permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the defendants from evicting the plaintiff from the fitness center without following due process of law.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff was found to be in possession of the rented property, and the court deemed the eviction attempts unlawful.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff was found to be in possession of the rented property, and the court deemed the eviction attempts unlawful.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff, who is in possession of the plaint schedule room, cannot be forcefully evicted otherwise than due process of law.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: the defendants and their men and agents are restrained by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from evicting the plaintiff from the plaint schedule room by force.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sreejith N.U
Party Age
31
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Nineesh Thankachan
Party Age
33
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Joseph Martin
Party Age
48
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Harikrishna Varma
Party Age
26
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Binu Jacob
Party Age
31
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney, Copy of the Partnership Deed, Copy of the FIR No. 0011, Computer generated copy of the e-mail communication, Copy of the Petition in RCP No. 135/2023
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
A Balagopalan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Ajit G Anjarlekar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Surjith B
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff requested a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from evicting him forcibly from the plaint schedule room.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to get a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from forcefully evicting the plaintiff from the plaint schedule room, otherwise than in due process of law, as sought for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document authorizes the power of attorney holder to conduct the case on behalf of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Partnership Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document outlines the partnership agreement of the plaintiff's fitness center.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: FIR
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as evidence of the police complaint filed regarding threats and intimidation.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Email Communication
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is relevant as it pertains to the communication regarding the lease agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Petition in Rent Control Case
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a petition that outlines the proceedings regarding eviction in a rent control case.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This report provides findings relevant to the case from a court-appointed commissioner.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Eviction and Rent Control
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Sreejith N.U vs Joseph Martin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Sreejith N.U vs Joseph Martin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Mon, 01/25/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Mon, 07/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Wed, 07/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Krishnakala Panicker vs Dibu K John regarding recovery of dues from tenant.
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between K.V. Thomas et al vs M/s ALTAIM et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Dr. Radha Devi vs Sri. Sunil Kumar C.S regarding realisation of money
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between K H Ramlath Nazer vs Apex India Education and Charitable Trust et al regarding realization of money
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Roby K. Skariah vs Merin Paul regarding realisation of money
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won