Thomas vs Biju Thomas — 300337/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: Bcf and steps. Next hearing: 17th July 2026.

Bcf and steps Next hearing 17-Jul-2026 this date has passed

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLER420005982024

e-Filing Number

29-11-2024

Filing Number

698/2024

Filing Date

29-Nov-2024

Registration No

300337/2024

Registration Date

29-Nov-2024

Court

Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor

Judge

1-Munsiff Perumbavoor

Last updated 14-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Thomas

    Adv. ALIAS K M

  2. 2.Joy K T

    Adv. ALIAS K M

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Biju Thomas

  2. 2.Praseetha Mathai

    Adv. Abhishek,Abhishek

  3. 3.Vijeesh K Mathai

    Adv. Abhishek,Abhishek

  4. 4.Kavitha Antony

    Adv. Abhishek,Abhishek

  5. 5.Ajitha Mathai

Case History

  1. 17-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Bcf and steps

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  3. 29-Jan-2026

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  4. 24-Nov-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  5. 12-Sep-2025

    For additional written statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  6. 11-Jun-2025

    Return of notice

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  7. 28-May-2025

    Issue notice

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  8. 08-Apr-2025

    OrderView PDF

  9. 08-Apr-2025

    OrderView PDF

    Summary: The court allowed I.A. 2/2024 in part and allowed I.A. 6/2025 in a property dispute regarding right of way. The defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiffs' use of the C-schedule pathway, while the plaintiffs are restrained from obstructing the defendants' use of the B-schedule pathway. The court found that while plaint B-schedule lacks clear demarcation, it can serve as access to the defendants' property, giving defendants priority over that route; conversely, plaint C-schedule is the only viable access for plaintiffs. No costs were awarded to either party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  10. 08-Apr-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  11. 07-Apr-2025

    Orders in IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  12. 01-Apr-2025

    Orders in IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  13. 25-Mar-2025

    Orders in IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  14. 22-Mar-2025

    Call on

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  15. 17-Mar-2025

    Orders in IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  16. 05-Mar-2025

    Call with IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  17. 27-Feb-2025

    For hearing on IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  18. 24-Feb-2025

    For hearing on IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  19. 21-Feb-2025

    For hearing on IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  20. 20-Feb-2025

    For hearing on IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  21. 19-Feb-2025

    For hearing on IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  22. 15-Feb-2025

    For Hearing

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  23. 10-Feb-2025

    No sitting notified

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  24. 04-Feb-2025

    Call with IA

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  25. 29-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  26. 06-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Perumbavoor

  27. 29-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 29-Nov-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 300337/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court allowed I.A. 2/2024 in part and allowed I.A. 6/2025 in a property dispute regarding right of way. The defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiffs' use of the C-schedule pathway, while the plaintiffs are restrained from obstructing the defendants' use of the B-schedule pathway. The court found that while plaint B-schedule lacks clear demarcation, it can serve as access to the defendants' property, giving defendants priority over that route; conversely, plaint C-schedule is the only viable access for plaintiffs. No costs were awarded to either party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case