Thottathil Ashokan vs Sree Narayan Samskarika Vedi Charitabl Trust Rey President Manu T Advocate - Sanil Kumar E — 169/2025
Case under Procedure Code \ Section S26O7R1. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLKN220005492025
Next Hearing
29th June 2026
e-Filing Number
20-03-2025
Filing Number
569/2025
Filing Date
20-03-2025
Registration No
169/2025
Registration Date
20-03-2025
Court
Munsiffss Court Kuthuparamba
Judge
1-Munsiff/JFCM No.2, Kuthuparamba
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Thottathil Ashokan
Adv. K.V.Pavithran
Respondent(s)
Sree Narayan Samskarika Vedi Charitabl Trust Rey President Manu T Advocate - Sanil Kumar E
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Munsiff/JFCM No.2, Kuthuparamba
Issues
Issues
For production of documents/Affidavit
Written Statement
Call on
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Issues |
| 28-02-2026 | Issues |
| 16-02-2026 | For production of documents/Affidavit |
| 29-01-2026 | Written Statement |
| 16-01-2026 | Call on |
Interim Orders
Summary: The petition for temporary prohibitory injunction filed by Thottathil Ashokan against Sree Narayana Samskarika Vedhi Charitable Trust was dismissed. The Munsiff's Court rejected the petitioner's challenge to an expulsion notice dated 08.03.2025, finding that the trust's decision to expel him—approved by 11 of 13 members at a general body meeting—did not warrant court intervention absent clear evidence of mala fide intent or statutory violations. The court held that membership disputes are maintainable suits not requiring Section 92 CPC leave, but declined to grant interim relief, leaving the substantive issues for full trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The petition for temporary prohibitory injunction filed by Thottathil Ashokan against Sree Narayana Samskarika Vedhi Charitable Trust was dismissed. The Munsiff's Court rejected the petitioner's challenge to an expulsion notice dated 08.03.2025, finding that the trust's decision to expel him—approved by 11 of 13 members at a general body meeting—did not warrant court intervention absent clear evidence of mala fide intent or statutory violations. The court held that membership disputes are maintainable suits not requiring Section 92 CPC leave, but declined to grant interim relief, leaving the substantive issues for full trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts