P.S. NARAYANASWAMY vs SANDEEP VIHAR OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION REP BY PRESIDENT — 1604/2025

Case under Ix Rule 9 R Aw 151 Cpc Section 26. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

Issues Next hearing 19-Jun-2026

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KABR700020572025

Filing Number

2046/2025

Filing Date

23-Jun-2025

Registration No

1604/2025

Registration Date

23-Jun-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,KRISHNARAJAPURAM

Judge

1125-CIVIL Judge And JMFC

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Ix Rule 9 R Aw 151 Cpc Section 26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.P.S. NARAYANASWAMY

    Adv. C.K. NANDAKUMAR

  2. 2.PARVEEN KAUR

  3. 3.BALVINDER SINGH (Retd)

  4. 4.N.S.SIROHI (Retd)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANDEEP VIHAR OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION REP BY PRESIDENT

  2. 2.ARMY WELFARE HOUSING ORGANIZATION

Case History

  1. 19-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  3. 04-Feb-2026

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  4. 09-Jan-2026

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  5. 08-Dec-2025

    OrdersView PDF

    Case Summary: O.S. No. 1604/2025 Outcome: Interim injunction applications (I.A. Nos. II and III) allowed; Defendant's court fee application (I.A. No. 35) rejected. Court granted temporary injunction restraining the apartment association and housing organization from interfering with 30 retired Army penthouse owners' peaceful possession and use of their units for dual occupancy (as two separate dwelling units) and their tenants' occupation, pending final trial disposal. The court found the owners made a prima facie case, established balance of convenience, and would suffer irreparable loss without the injunction, noting the sale deed contained no restriction on dual occupancy while the association's 2019 resolution restricting it appeared potentially contrary to public policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 08-Dec-2025

    Issues

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  7. 26-Nov-2025

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  8. 10-Nov-2025

    Orders

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  9. 07-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  10. 27-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  11. 10-Oct-2025

    Objections

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  12. 23-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  13. 22-Aug-2025

    Amended plaint

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  14. 02-Aug-2025

    Amended plaint

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  15. 16-Jul-2025

    Amended plaint

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  16. 23-Jun-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  17. 23-Jun-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1604/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. No. 1604/2025 Outcome: Interim injunction applications (I.A. Nos. II and III) allowed; Defendant's court fee application (I.A. No. 35) rejected. Court granted temporary injunction restraining the apartment association and housing organization from interfering with 30 retired Army penthouse owners' peaceful possession and use of their units for dual occupancy (as two separate dwelling units) and their tenants' occupation, pending final trial disposal. The court found the owners made a prima facie case, established balance of convenience, and would suffer irreparable loss without the injunction, noting the sale deed contained no restriction on dual occupancy while the association's 2019 resolution restricting it appeared potentially contrary to public policy. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case