Radhika Balachandran vs Sindhu T Advocate - A K Kuriakose — 100315/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Disposed: Uncontested--DECREED WITH COST on 30th March 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLKT170007522023
Filing Number
100547/2023
Filing Date
09-Nov-2023
Registration No
100315/2023
Registration Date
09-Nov-2023
Court
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Judge
1-Munsiff, Kanjirappally
Decision Date
30-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DECREED WITH COST
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Radhika Balachandran
Adv. GIRISH S NAIR
Respondent(s)
-
1.Sindhu T Advocate - A K Kuriakose
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
30-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Case Summary: O.S. 315/2023 Court Decision: The Munsiff court granted a partial decree in favor of Radhika Balachandran. The court issued a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendant Sindhu T. from trespassing into the plaintiff's property (a room used for business) and obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession. The plaintiff was also awarded suit costs against the defendant. Key Reasoning: The court found that the plaintiff had clear title and ownership of the property through a valid sale deed, while the defendant was merely a licensee who had defaulted on monthly rent payments and vacated the property on 31 July 2023. The defendant's removal of all movables from the premises meant the plaintiff's apprehension of potential future trespass was reasonable and justified the injunction, though a mandatory injunction was denied since all disputed movables had already been removed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Mar-2026
Disposed
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
21-Mar-2026
For Hearing
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
16-Mar-2026
Call On
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
03-Mar-2026
Return of Notice
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
20-Jan-2026
Listed to
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
05-Jan-2026
Call On
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
11-Dec-2025
For Reports
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
02-Dec-2025
Pre Trial Steps
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
15-Nov-2025
Order/Judgement
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
10-Nov-2025
For Objection
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
11-Sep-2025
For Objection
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
16-Aug-2025
Pre Trial Steps
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
16-Jun-2025
Issues
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
06-Mar-2025
Issues
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
11-Dec-2024
Issues
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
14-Oct-2024
Report on Mediation
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
13-Aug-2024
Report on Mediation
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
05-Jul-2024
Appearance of Parties
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
28-Jun-2024
Appearance of Parties
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
25-Mar-2024
Exparte Evidence
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
19-Feb-2024
Written Statement
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
19-Jan-2024
Written Statement
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
16-Jan-2024
Call On
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
12-Dec-2023
Written Statement
Munsiff, Kanjirappally
-
09-Nov-2023
OrderView PDF
-
09-Nov-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Nov-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 100315/2023
Case Summary: O.S. 315/2023 Court Decision: The Munsiff court granted a partial decree in favor of Radhika Balachandran. The court issued a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining defendant Sindhu T. from trespassing into the plaintiff's property (a room used for business) and obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession. The plaintiff was also awarded suit costs against the defendant. Key Reasoning: The court found that the plaintiff had clear title and ownership of the property through a valid sale deed, while the defendant was merely a licensee who had defaulted on monthly rent payments and vacated the property on 31 July 2023. The defendant's removal of all movables from the premises meant the plaintiff's apprehension of potential future trespass was reasonable and justified the injunction, though a mandatory injunction was denied since all disputed movables had already been removed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts