Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S.No.1560/2025

Case between Canara Bank vs Chithra.M, Mariyappan regarding security for property

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri.Mithun Gopi.G.S.
Order Date
2025-09-20
Duration
Case Code No.
1560
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Canara Bank is the plaintiff represented by its manager. The defendants, Chithra.M and Mariyappan, are being asked to furnish security for a stipulated amount to prevent the disposal of the petition schedule property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court has directed the defendants to furnish security for the sum of Rs.2,40,000/- and conditionally attached the petition schedule property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Conditional attachment of the petition schedule property and direction to furnish security.
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The court has directed the defendants to furnish security for the sum of Rs.2,40,000/- and conditionally attached the petition schedule property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case and that the defendants' actions may obstruct future enforcement.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case and that the defendants' actions may obstruct future enforcement.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner/ plaintiff has made out a prima facie case and I am satisfied that the counter petitioners/defendants with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that may be passed against him is about to dispose of the whole or any part of the petition schedule property.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the counter petitioners / defendants are directed either to furnish security for the sum of Rs.2,40,000/- to appear and show cause why they should not furnish security.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Chithra.M
Party Age
62
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mariyappan
Party Age
66
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Adv.Sreena.L.K.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The counter petitioners/defendants are directed either to furnish security for the sum of Rs.2,40,000/- to appear and show cause why they should not furnish security.
Evidence:
the counter petitioners/defendants with intent to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree that may be passed against him is about to dispose of the whole or any part of the petition schedule property.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The petition schedule property is conditionally attached.
Evidence:
the petition schedule property is conditionally attached.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2025

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Sanilkumar.N et al regarding dismissal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Ravin R.S et al regarding suit dismissal
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Union Bank of India vs Sabeen Mohammad Iqbal regarding dismissal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Nirmala A regarding dismissal for default
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Mujeeb Rahiman Muhammed vs HDFC Bank Ltd. et al regarding injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR
Injunction Defendant Won