Sisilymol Sosamma vs Sunilkumar K S Advocate - padmakumar adv, padmakumar adv — 500054/2025
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 28th March 2026.
Crl.MP - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETN.
CNR: KLAL190009002025
e-Filing Number
20-05-2025
Filing Number
900/2025
Filing Date
20-05-2025
Registration No
500054/2025
Registration Date
20-05-2025
Court
JFMC II, Mavelikkara
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara
Decision Date
28th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sisilymol Sosamma
Adv. SUDHEER KHAN S, SUDHEER KHAN S
Respondent(s)
Sunilkumar K S Advocate - padmakumar adv, padmakumar adv
Omanayamma
Deepa Sarath
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Mavelikara
Disposed
Order/Judgement
Order/Judgement
For further hearing
For further hearing
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 28-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 19-03-2026 | Order/Judgement | |
| 09-03-2026 | Order/Judgement | |
| 05-03-2026 | For further hearing | |
| 02-03-2026 | For further hearing |
Interim Orders
The Mavelikara Judicial First Class Magistrate partly allowed an interim application under Section 23(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by Sisilimol Sosamma against three respondents. The court granted an ex parte interim order restraining the respondents from obstructing her peaceful residence at Shibu bhavanam and prohibiting them from alienating or encumbering 3.24 acres of property, based on prima facie satisfaction that domestic violence was likely. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Mavelikara Judicial First Class Magistrate partly allowed an interim application under Section 23(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by Sisilimol Sosamma against three respondents. The court granted an ex parte interim order restraining the respondents from obstructing her peaceful residence at Shibu bhavanam and prohibiting them from alienating or encumbering 3.24 acres of property, based on prima facie satisfaction that domestic violence was likely. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts