Anandhan vs Gireesh Advocate - MURALEEDHARAN P K — 56/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Section 104 and Order XLIII Rule 1(r). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 31st March 2026.

Case disposed

CMA - CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL

CNR: KLKT010036352025

Filing Number

636/2025

Filing Date

21-Oct-2025

Registration No

56/2025

Registration Date

22-Oct-2025

Court

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

Judge

2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

Decision Date

31-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

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

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Anandhan

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  2. 2.Kunjumani

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  3. 3.Arun

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  4. 4.Ranesh

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  5. 5.Sudheesh @ Vavachi

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  6. 6.Nithin

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  7. 7.Binoy

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  8. 8.Amal

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

  9. 9.Abhilash

    Adv. SAJAN VARGHESE A

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Gireesh Advocate - MURALEEDHARAN P K

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 31-Mar-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    Summary of Case 56/2025 The Additional District Judge dismissed civil appeals by defendants (Anandhan, Kunjumani, Arun and six others) challenging a temporary injunction order that restrained them from widening a 3-foot pathway on plaintiff Gireesh's property. The court found that defendants failed to produce credible documentary evidence—such as a signed surrender form or bilateral agreement—to establish voluntary land surrender to the Panchayat as required under the Panchayat Raj Act, and the commissioner's report confirmed the pathway was newly formed, rejecting their claim of a public road vested in the Panchayat. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 31-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  4. 26-Mar-2026

    For Further Hearing

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    For Further Hearing

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  6. 07-Mar-2026

    For Further Hearing

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  7. 23-Feb-2026

    For Hearing

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  8. 06-Feb-2026

    Await Lcr

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  9. 22-Jan-2026

    For Hearing

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  10. 06-Jan-2026

    Await Records

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  11. 27-Nov-2025

    Await Lcr

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  12. 24-Nov-2025

    For Objection

    Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

  13. 24-Oct-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 21-Oct-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 56/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 56/2025 The Additional District Judge dismissed civil appeals by defendants (Anandhan, Kunjumani, Arun and six others) challenging a temporary injunction order that restrained them from widening a 3-foot pathway on plaintiff Gireesh's property. The court found that defendants failed to produce credible documentary evidence—such as a signed surrender form or bilateral agreement—to establish voluntary land surrender to the Panchayat as required under the Panchayat Raj Act, and the commissioner's report confirmed the pathway was newly formed, rejecting their claim of a public road vested in the Panchayat. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case