C T Micheal vs C T Yesudas Advocate - SATHJITH S. S, SATHJITH S. S — 451/2025
Case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section Section 26 Order 7 Rule 1. Status: For Steps. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLAL110009742025
Next Hearing
15th June 2026
Filing Number
978/2025
Filing Date
16-09-2025
Registration No
451/2025
Registration Date
17-09-2025
Court
Munsiff Court, Cherthala
Judge
1-Principal Munsiff. Cherthala
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
C T Micheal
Adv. BALACHANDRAN N, Bhupesh B, AKHIL R BABU
Respondent(s)
C T Yesudas Advocate - SATHJITH S. S, SATHJITH S. S
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal Munsiff. Cherthala
For Steps
Further steps
Call on
Order In IA
For hearing on IA
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-05-2026 | For Steps |
| 06-04-2026 | Further steps |
| 24-03-2026 | Call on |
| 17-03-2026 | Order In IA |
| 13-03-2026 | For hearing on IA |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed – Interim Mandatory Injunction Granted The Principal Munsiff, Cherthala granted an interim mandatory injunction in favor of plaintiff C.T. Michael, directing defendant C.T. Yesudas to restore the leased shop property to its original condition by removing all unauthorized constructions and alterations made after the suit's institution, within two weeks. The court found the defendant violated a prior injunction order by carrying out further construction activities (plastering, glass installation, etc.) on December 4, 2025, and held that restoration was necessary to preserve the suit's integrity and prevent irreparable injury to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed – Interim Mandatory Injunction Granted The Principal Munsiff, Cherthala granted an interim mandatory injunction in favor of plaintiff C.T. Michael, directing defendant C.T. Yesudas to restore the leased shop property to its original condition by removing all unauthorized constructions and alterations made after the suit's institution, within two weeks. The court found the defendant violated a prior injunction order by carrying out further construction activities (plastering, glass installation, etc.) on December 4, 2025, and held that restoration was necessary to preserve the suit's integrity and prevent irreparable injury to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts