Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 137/2025

Case between Reenamony vs Remany, Govinda Raj Ben @ Biju regarding injunction

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Judge
Sri. ARAVIND.P
Order Date
2025-03-28
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Reenamony is the petitioner seeking protection against the defendants Remany and Govinda Raj Ben @ Biju. The case involves a request for an interim injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court granted an interim injunction to the petitioner to prevent the defendants from encroaching on the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Interim injunction against defendants
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court granted an interim injunction to the petitioner to prevent the defendants from encroaching on the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
A prima facie case is made out and irreparable injury would occur without the injunction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
I am satisfied that, a prima facie case is made out and the delay in issuing notice in this I.A. will defeat the very purpose of the suit.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence the respondents are restrained from encroaching into petition schedule property and committing any act of waste therein and further restrained from destroying the lock installed in the gate until further order.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Reenamony
Party Age
64
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Remany
Party Age
67
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Govinda Raj Ben @ Biju
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Saj. S. Sivan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Respondents are restrained from encroaching into petition schedule property and committing any act of waste therein.
Evidence:
If ad-interim injunction is not granted, irreparable injury will be caused to the petitioner. Hence the respondents are restrained from encroaching into petition schedule property and committing any act of waste therein and further restrained from destroying the lock installed in the gate until further order.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Reenamony vs Remany, Govinda Raj Ben @ Biju regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Reenamony vs Remany, Govinda Raj Ben @ Biju regarding injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Trivandrum
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Sunitha vs Shibu Purushothaman regarding temporary injunction.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between The Federal Bank, Ltd vs Siyad. S, Haseena Beevi regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Margaret Solomon Cruz et al vs Mabel James et al regarding declaration of title and injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Babu Rajan N. et al vs The Government Of Kerala regarding declaration of civil death
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sheena vs Anvar et al regarding temporary injunction against illegal business.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won