Vikraman Nair vs Pradeep Kumar Advocate - prasannan — 100042/2018

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O43,R1. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 31st March 2026.

Case disposed

AS - CIVIL APPEAL

CNR: KLKM270003622018

Filing Number

203/2018

Filing Date

27-Jul-2018

Registration No

100042/2018

Registration Date

28-Jul-2018

Court

Sub Court Karunagappally

Judge

1-Sub Judge

Decision Date

31-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O43,R1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Vikraman Nair

    Adv. Jayakrishnan S.

  2. 2.Santhakumari@Vijayakumari

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Pradeep Kumar Advocate - prasannan

  2. 2.Lekshmi Vikram

  3. 3.Reshmi Vikram

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 31-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: AS No. 42/2018 The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, finding that Pradeep Kumar (1st defendant) holds the valid lease to the jewellery shop from Oachira Temple, not Vikraman Nair (plaintiff). The court determined the plaintiff failed to prove independent tenancy rights and was merely assisting the business as a relative, while defendants established their legal claim through a valid lease deed and rent receipts. The suit was dismissed and a mandatory injunction issued directing the plaintiff to vacate within 90 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 31-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Sub Judge

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  7. 28-Feb-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  9. 17-Feb-2026

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  10. 31-Jan-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  11. 23-Jan-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  12. 17-Jan-2026

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  13. 12-Jan-2026

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  14. 10-Jan-2026

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  15. 20-Dec-2025

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  16. 17-Dec-2025

    For judgment

    Sub Judge

  17. 01-Dec-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  18. 25-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  19. 14-Nov-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  20. 03-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  21. 28-Oct-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  22. 24-Oct-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  23. 15-Oct-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  24. 23-Sep-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  25. 11-Sep-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  26. 12-Aug-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  27. 22-Jul-2025

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  28. 07-Jul-2025

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  29. 04-Jun-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  30. 09-Apr-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  31. 22-Mar-2025

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  32. 25-Feb-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  33. 11-Feb-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  34. 08-Jan-2025

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  35. 30-Nov-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  36. 15-Nov-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  37. 18-Oct-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  38. 13-Sep-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  39. 08-Aug-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  40. 03-Jul-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  41. 06-Jun-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  42. 30-Mar-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  43. 26-Feb-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  44. 16-Jan-2024

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  45. 25-Nov-2023

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  46. 21-Sep-2023

    Return of notice

    Sub Judge

  47. 03-Aug-2023

    Return of notice

    Sub Judge

  48. 04-Jul-2023

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  49. 10-Feb-2023

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  50. 30-Jan-2023

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  51. 07-Dec-2022

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  52. 11-Oct-2022

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  53. 05-Jul-2022

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  54. 26-Mar-2022

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  55. 08-Feb-2022

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  56. 29-Nov-2021

    Call with

    Sub Judge

  57. 25-Oct-2021

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  58. 26-Aug-2021

    Call with IA

    Sub Judge

  59. 08-Jul-2021

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  60. 26-May-2021

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  61. 16-Mar-2021

    Call with

    Sub Judge

  62. 29-Jan-2021

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  63. 03-Nov-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  64. 25-Sep-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  65. 18-Aug-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  66. 23-Jun-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  67. 23-May-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  68. 19-Mar-2020

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  69. 06-Jan-2020

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  70. 04-Nov-2019

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  71. 29-Aug-2019

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  72. 21-Jun-2019

    Call on

    Sub Judge

  73. 14-Feb-2019

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  74. 25-Jan-2019

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  75. 18-Jan-2019

    For Order

    Sub Judge

  76. 05-Oct-2018

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  77. 12-Sep-2018

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  78. 01-Sep-2018

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  79. 14-Aug-2018

    For Hearing

    Sub Judge

  80. 31-Jul-2018

    Adjourned

    Sub Judge

  81. 30-Jul-2018

    No sitting notified

    Sub Judge

  82. 28-Jul-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  83. 27-Jul-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. 100042/2018

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: AS No. 42/2018 The appellate court reversed the trial court's decision, finding that Pradeep Kumar (1st defendant) holds the valid lease to the jewellery shop from Oachira Temple, not Vikraman Nair (plaintiff). The court determined the plaintiff failed to prove independent tenancy rights and was merely assisting the business as a relative, while defendants established their legal claim through a valid lease deed and rent receipts. The suit was dismissed and a mandatory injunction issued directing the plaintiff to vacate within 90 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case