Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.447/2024

Case between Sankaranarayanan.U vs Sandeep.M.S et al regarding realisation of money

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-II
Judge
Smt. Sincy Jacob
Order Date
2025-06-17
Duration
Case Code No.
447
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Sankaranarayanan.U filed a petition against Sandeep.M.S, Sindhulekha, and Smitha regarding the realization of a loan amount secured by a mortgage on property. The petitioner claims that the respondents are trying to alienate the property despite the mortgage agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the petition for attachment of the plaint schedule property and removed the attachment over the property.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition for attachment of the plaint schedule property and removed the attachment over the property.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner could not establish a valid claim over the property, as the third respondent holds legal ownership.
Why Defendant Won:
The petitioner could not establish a valid claim over the property, as the third respondent holds legal ownership.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner has no case that the third respondent borrowed the amount from him. Further, the validity of Ext A1 mortgage deed is to be considered. It is not registered as per Section 17(1) of the Registration Act 1908. Hence that cannot be considered as valid.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is dismissed with costs. Hence, the attachment over the plaint schedule property is removed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sankaranarayanan.U
Party Age
44
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sandeep.M.S
Party Age
41
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sindhulekha
Party Age
43
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Smitha
Party Age
45
Plaintiffs Documents
Mortgage Deed No. A1 dated 16/07/2021, Complaint submitted before the Police dated 02/03/2024, Rent Deed dated 03/02/2023
Defendants Documents
Encumbrance Certificate dated 08/08/2024, Tax Receipt dated 10/10/2023, Sale Deed dated 10/08/2022, Copy of Ownership Certificate

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.M.Salahudeen
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Ajithakumari.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The petition for attachment of the plaint schedule property was filed by the petitioner.
Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed with costs. Hence, the attachment over the plaint schedule property is removed.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Mortgage Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court used this document to assess the claim regarding the mortgage for securing the borrowed amount.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Complaint submitted before the Police
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court used this document to understand the petitioner's complaints regarding the respondents.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Rent Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court considered this document to evaluate the claims related to possession of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Encumbrance certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court reviewed this document to determine the ownership status of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Tax receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court used this document to verify the tax payments related to the property.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court relied on this document to establish the third respondent's ownership of the property.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: GD Register of the Police Station
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court referenced this document in relation to the threats reported by the third respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Complaint given by the 3rd Defendant
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court utilized this document to understand the third respondent's perspective.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Copy of Ownership Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court used this document to affirm the ownership claims of the third respondent.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Copy of Encumbrance Certificate
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court referenced this document to examine the title and liabilities associated with the property.
Reference:
Ext.B8

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2024

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between M/S Mulamoottil Consumer Credits Limited vs Shajahan et al regarding realisation of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Punjab National Bank vs Krishna Prasad.A.S. et al regarding realisation of money.
Court of Additional Munsiff-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Mulamoottil Consumer Credits Limited vs Joseph et al regarding realisation of money.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Rajesh Kumar.G regarding realization of money
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jayan. E et al regarding realisation of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won