Geogy Joseph vs Sini Jiji Advocate - K.Madhavan Pillai — 43/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order XLIII Rule 1 (r),Section 104. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 24th April 2026.

Case disposed

CMA - CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL

CNR: KLKT010027162025

Filing Number

623/2025

Filing Date

04-Aug-2025

Registration No

43/2025

Registration Date

18-Aug-2025

Court

Principal District & Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kottayam

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

Decision Date

24-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Order XLIII Rule 1 (r),Section 104

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Geogy Joseph

    Adv. AGI JOSEPH

  2. 2.K C Thomas

    Adv. AGI JOSEPH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sini Jiji Advocate - K.Madhavan Pillai

  2. 2.Jiji George Joseph

    Adv. K.Madhavan Pillai

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Case Summary: CMA No. 43/2025 Court Decision: The Principal District Judge set aside the trial court's order granting temporary prohibitory injunction to the plaintiffs and instead granted a temporary mandatory injunction directing the first plaintiff and her children to vacate the disputed property. The court found that the plaintiffs (Sini Jiji and Jiji George Joseph) lacked a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored the defendants. Key factors included the second plaintiff's earlier admission in a partition suit that the building belonged solely to the first defendant, the first plaintiff's unexplained absence in South Africa until May 2024, and evidence that the plaintiff entered the property only after obtaining the injunction order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  4. 16-Apr-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  5. 31-Mar-2026

    Order/Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  6. 30-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  7. 27-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  8. 16-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  9. 03-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  10. 09-Feb-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  11. 14-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  12. 27-Nov-2025

    Call On

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  13. 06-Nov-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  14. 08-Oct-2025

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  15. 27-Sep-2025

    Call On

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  16. 20-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  17. 04-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 43/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CMA No. 43/2025 Court Decision: The Principal District Judge set aside the trial court's order granting temporary prohibitory injunction to the plaintiffs and instead granted a temporary mandatory injunction directing the first plaintiff and her children to vacate the disputed property. The court found that the plaintiffs (Sini Jiji and Jiji George Joseph) lacked a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored the defendants. Key factors included the second plaintiff's earlier admission in a partition suit that the building belonged solely to the first defendant, the first plaintiff's unexplained absence in South Africa until May 2024, and evidence that the plaintiff entered the property only after obtaining the injunction order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case