Lissy @ Alekutty vs Varghese Scaria Advocate - Jiby Sebastian — 1400529/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: Listed to. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLID140006822022

Listed to

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1400834/2022

Filing Date

03-12-2022

Registration No

1400529/2022

Registration Date

03-12-2022

Court

Munsiff Court Kattappana

Judge

1-Munsiff Kattappana

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code Section 26
IA/4/2025 Classification : Section Varghese ScariaLissy @ Alekutty
IA/5/2025 Classification : Section Lissy @ AlekuttyVarghese Scaria

Petitioner(s)

Lissy @ Alekutty

Adv. Shiji Joseph

Respondent(s)

Varghese Scaria Advocate - Jiby Sebastian

Thankachan

Adv. Jiby Sebastian

Thomas

Adv. Jiby Sebastian

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Munsiff Kattappana

10-03-2026

Listed to

07-02-2026

Written Statement

07-01-2026

Written Statement

09-12-2025

For additional written statement

14-11-2025

For additional written statement

Interim Orders

04-11-2025
Final Order

Summary The petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code by the plaintiff (Lissy) seeking to amend the plaint description of property boundaries and road length was allowed. The court held that the amendments regarding the eastern and western boundaries of the B schedule property and the corrected road length of 75 meters (instead of 200 meters) are necessary for determining the real questions in controversy, and any incorrect pleading will only affect the plaintiff's case without prejudicing the defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code by the plaintiff (Lissy) seeking to amend the plaint description of property boundaries and road length was allowed. The court held that the amendments regarding the eastern and western boundaries of the B schedule property and the corrected road length of 75 meters (instead of 200 meters) are necessary for determining the real questions in controversy, and any incorrect pleading will only affect the plaintiff's case without prejudicing the defendants. 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 Kattappana All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case