Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 1849/2024

Case between S.Sathyan vs Shaj C.P, Deepa. V.S, Bright Yesudasan Mariyam Thanjam regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-RCC
Judge
Smt.Salini.B
Order Date
2025-10-18
Duration
approximately-1 year 0 days
Case Closed
Sat, 10/18/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, S.Sathyan, is seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants who are joint owners of a property related to a sale agreement. The defendants have allegedly evaded their obligations under the agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, issuing a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. The injunction restrains the defendants from transferring the property in question.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from transferring the plaint schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, issuing a permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants. The injunction restrains the defendants from transferring the property in question.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence provided by the plaintiff was unchallenged and proved the case for the sought injunction.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence provided by the plaintiff was unchallenged and proved the case for the sought injunction.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff's unchallenged evidence proves his case and he is entitled to a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction as sought for.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from transferring the plaint schedule property in the name of the 3rd defendant or his relatives.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
S.Sathyan
Party Age
49
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Shaj C.P
Party Age
56
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Deepa. V.S
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Bright Yesudasan Mariyam Thanjam
Party Age
43
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original sale agreement dated 19.10.2022, Copy of tax receipt dated 31.05.2022, Original cheque No.049374 dated 05.06.2024, Copy of suit notice, Reply notice dated 08.07.2024, Unclaimed notice dated 17.07.2024, Unclaimed notice dated 04.11.2024, Unclaimed notice dated 26.11.2024
Defendants Documents
Nil

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Jose Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendants from transferring the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
the suit is decreed with costs restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants by a decree of permanent prohibitory injunction from transferring the plaint schedule property in the name of the 3rd defendant or his relatives or from creating any documents regarding the plaint schedule property in favour of the 3rd defendant until the return of the advance amount received from the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Sale Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the agreement for sale dated 19.10.2022 in favor of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Copy of Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Serves as evidence related to the financial transaction.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Original Cheque
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of the cheque issued by the 2nd defendant which was dishonoured.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Copy of suit notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Legal notice sent to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Response from the defendants to the legal notice.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Unclaimed Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows evidence of notice sent to the defendants which remained unclaimed.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Unclaimed Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Continued evidence of notices to the defendants which were unclaimed.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Unclaimed Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further notice sent to the defendants which also remained unclaimed.
Reference:
Ext.A8

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Cheque dishonour
Case Code
Case between S.Sathyan vs Shaj C.P, Deepa. V.S, Bright Yesudasan Mariyam Thanjam regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between S.Sathyan vs Shaj C.P, Deepa. V.S, Bright Yesudasan Mariyam Thanjam regarding Permanent prohibitory injunction

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
Sat, 10/19/2024 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 10/18/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 10/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won