K G Eldhose vs Pavithran M R — 300272/2018

Case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section S26,O7,R1. Status: Listed to. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLER420003832018

Listed to

Next Hearing

08th June 2026

Filing Number

300445/2018

Filing Date

28-09-2018

Registration No

300272/2018

Registration Date

29-09-2018

Court

Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor

Judge

1-Munsiff Perumbavoor

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section S26,O7,R1
Ia/1/2025 Classification : Survey Commission Application Section K G EldhosePavithran M R

Petitioner(s)

K G Eldhose

Adv. M B Sandeep

Ammini Eldhose

Adv. M B Sandeep

Respondent(s)

Pavithran M R

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Munsiff Perumbavoor

07-03-2026

Listed to

16-02-2026

For Steps

02-02-2026

For Steps

09-01-2026

For Steps

11-12-2025

For Depositting Batta

Interim Orders

09-12-2024
Order

Summary The Court of the Munsiff, Perumbavoor allowed the amendment petition filed by the plaintiffs (K.G. Eldhose and Ammini). The court permitted amendment of the original suit to include prayers for restraining the defendant from using an additional portion of property (part of Schedule A) and to reinstate a compound wall, in addition to the existing prayer against unauthorized use of the B schedule way. The court found that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit and would not prejudice the defendant who has no claimed rights over the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Court of the Munsiff, Perumbavoor allowed the amendment petition filed by the plaintiffs (K.G. Eldhose and Ammini). The court permitted amendment of the original suit to include prayers for restraining the defendant from using an additional portion of property (part of Schedule A) and to reinstate a compound wall, in addition to the existing prayer against unauthorized use of the B schedule way. The court found that the amendment did not change the nature of the suit and would not prejudice the defendant who has no claimed rights over the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case