Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
Original Suit No. 262 of 2016

Case between K.M. Sankaran Nair vs Thayyil Askar et al regarding boundary fixation

Court
Court of the Munsiff of Tirur
Judge
Smt. Vincy.T.V.
Order Date
2016-10-19
Duration
Not mentioned
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Plaintiff, K.M. Sankaran Nair, aged 79, filed suit against defendants Thayyil Askar and Mumthas seeking boundary fixation, Mandatory injunction, and permanent prohibitory injunction. The plaintiff later filed a statement to not press the suit resulting in dismissal without costs.

Judgment Outcome

Partial Relief
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff without costs.
Judgment Favored
Dismissed
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit - Boundary Fixation, Injunction
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Judgment Evidence:

The suit for boundary fixation, Mandatory injunction, and permanent prohibitory injunction is dismissed as not pressed without costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

K.M. Sankaran Nair (79 years) Puthoor amsom, desom, Post Othukkungal, Thirurangadi Taluk

Defendants

Thayyil Askar (45 years) Puthoor amsom, Cherukunn desom, Post Othukkungal, Thirurangadi Taluk Mumthas (40 years) Puthoor amsom, Cherukunn desom, Post Othukkungal, Thirurangadi Taluk

Reliefs

Relief Type: Boundary Fixation
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Fixation of boundary
Evidence:
The suit was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff without costs.
Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Mandatory injunction
Evidence:
The suit was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff without costs.
Relief Type: Permanent Prohibitory Injunction
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Permanent prohibitory injunction
Evidence:
The suit was dismissed as not pressed by the plaintiff without costs.

Documents & Evidence

Quick Facts

Location
Tirurangadi Taluk
Case Filed
Wed, 10/19/2016 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases