Jose.N.J vs Joseph Thomas Advocate - Lithin Thomas — 100085/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26,O7,R1to7. Status: Stay Report. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLKT150001322023

Stay Report

Next Hearing

17th June 2026

Filing Number

100121/2023

Filing Date

20-05-2023

Registration No

100085/2023

Registration Date

20-05-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Ettumanoor

Judge

1-MUNSIFF, ETTUMANOOR

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 26,O7,R1to7
IA/10/2025 Classification : Amendment Application Section Jose.N.JJoseph Thomas

Petitioner(s)

Jose.N.J

Adv. K.Vinodkumar

Respondent(s)

Joseph Thomas Advocate - Lithin Thomas

George Joseph

Adv. Lithin Thomas,LITHIN

Thankamma George @ Thankamma

Adv. Lithin Thomas,LITHIN

Hearing History

Judge: 1-MUNSIFF, ETTUMANOOR

30-05-2026

Stay Report

04-04-2026

Verify And Report

16-03-2026

Verify And Report

25-02-2026

Stayed Call On

18-02-2026

For Hearing

Interim Orders

20-05-2023
Order
20-05-2023
Order
08-10-2025
Order

Case Summary: 100085/2023 Outcome: The application to exclude the counter-claim was allowed; the counter-claim is excluded. Key Issue: Plaintiff Jose N.J sought to exclude a counter-claim filed by defendants Joseph Thomas, George Joseph, and Thankamma George in a property dispute case involving trespass and injunction claims. Court's Reasoning: The Munsiff Court held that the counter-claim raises issues requiring resolution in a separate suit because necessary parties (prior property owners and defendants' siblings) cannot be impleaded. The counter-claim involves boundary fixation disputes unrelated to the plaintiff's title, requiring independent consideration that cannot be properly decided within this suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 100085/2023 Outcome: The application to exclude the counter-claim was allowed; the counter-claim is excluded. Key Issue: Plaintiff Jose N.J sought to exclude a counter-claim filed by defendants Joseph Thomas, George Joseph, and Thankamma George in a property dispute case involving trespass and injunction claims. Court's Reasoning: The Munsiff Court held that the counter-claim raises issues requiring resolution in a separate suit because necessary parties (prior property owners and defendants' siblings) cannot be impleaded. The counter-claim involves boundary fixation disputes unrelated to the plaintiff's title, requiring independent consideration that cannot be properly decided within this suit. 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, Ettumanoor All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case