Syed Shihabuddin Roshan vs K.V.Sasikumar Advocate - SANTHOSH. A. S, HARISH.S.K, HARISH.S.KSUNIL NATH.N.B, — 200438/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.

Issues Next hearing 03-Jun-2026

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLAL110010712023

e-Filing Number

20-08-2023

Filing Number

201221/2023

Filing Date

21-Aug-2023

Registration No

200438/2023

Registration Date

21-Aug-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Cherthala

Judge

2-Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26
Ia/6/2025 Classification : Section K.V.SasikumarSyed Shihabuddin Roshan
Ia/7/2025 Classification : Section K.V.SasikumarSyed Shihabuddin Roshan
Ia/8/2025 Classification : Section K.V.SasikumarSyed Shihabuddin Roshan
Ia/9/2025 Classification : Advance Application Section K.V.SasikumarSyed Shihabuddin Roshan

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Syed Shihabuddin Roshan

    Adv. REMYA S.R, REMYA S.R

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.K.V.Sasikumar Advocate - SANTHOSH. A. S, HARISH.S.K, HARISH.S.KSUNIL NATH.N.B,

Case History

  1. 03-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 12-Mar-2026

    Issues

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  3. 05-Jan-2026

    Appearance Of Parties

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  4. 19-Nov-2025

    Final OrderView PDF

    SUMMARY: The Court granted a temporary injunction petition filed by the property owner (petitioner/defendant). The respondent, whose fish cultivation license expired on 31/08/2023, is restrained from conducting any fish cultivation, making developmental activities, or committing waste on the property until the suit is disposed. The court found that the respondent has no legal right to continue activities after license expiration and that the balance of convenience favors the property owner's right to protect his property from unauthorized interference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 19-Nov-2025

    Written Statement

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  6. 31-Oct-2025

    Order/Judgement

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  7. 08-Oct-2025

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  8. 18-Sep-2025

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  9. 11-Sep-2025

    For commission report

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  10. 22-Aug-2025

    For commission report

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  11. 18-Jul-2025

    For Written Statement on Counter Claim

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  12. 28-May-2025

    Issues

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  13. 27-Feb-2025

    Appearance Of Parties

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  14. 16-Dec-2024

    OrderView PDF

  15. 16-Dec-2024

    OrderView PDF

  16. 16-Dec-2024

    Appearance Of Parties

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  17. 21-Nov-2024

    Order In IA

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  18. 20-Nov-2024

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  19. 18-Nov-2024

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  20. 15-Nov-2024

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  21. 11-Sep-2024

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  22. 31-Aug-2024

    For Hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  23. 21-Aug-2024

    For Objection and hearing

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  24. 18-Jun-2024

    Return of summons

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  25. 06-Mar-2024

    Return of summons

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  26. 01-Dec-2023

    Return of summons

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  27. 08-Sep-2023

    Return of summons

    Additional Munsiff, Cherthala

  28. 22-Aug-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  29. 21-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 200438/2023

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The Court granted a temporary injunction petition filed by the property owner (petitioner/defendant). The respondent, whose fish cultivation license expired on 31/08/2023, is restrained from conducting any fish cultivation, making developmental activities, or committing waste on the property until the suit is disposed. The court found that the respondent has no legal right to continue activities after license expiration and that the balance of convenience favors the property owner's right to protect his property from unauthorized interference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case