Ungungungal Namaskara Palli Committee vs Faluludheen — 300286/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section SEC26ORDER7RULE1. Disposed: Uncontested--DECREED IN TERMS OF COMPROMISE. on 09th March 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLML200006162023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

06-11-2023

Filing Number

607/2023

Filing Date

06-11-2023

Registration No

300286/2023

Registration Date

06-11-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Parappanagadi

Judge

4-Munsiff,Parappanangadi

Decision Date

09th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DECREED IN TERMS OF COMPROMISE.

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code Section SEC26ORDER7RULE1
IA/5/2024 Classification : Section Ungungungal Namaskara Palli CommitteeFaluludheen
IA/8/2024 Classification : Section Ungungungal Namaskara Palli Committee

Petitioner(s)

Ungungungal Namaskara Palli Committee

Adv. ABOOBACKER SIDHEEQUE P

Muhammed Mujeeb Rahman

Adv. ABOOBACKER SIDHEEQUE P

Respondent(s)

Faluludheen

Hearing History

Judge: 4-Munsiff,Parappanangadi

09-03-2026

Disposed

29-01-2026

Report on mediation

27-01-2026

Appearance of Partie

25-11-2025

Issues

27-08-2025

Issues

Final Orders / Judgements

09-03-2026

Judgement

Interim Orders

17-02-2024
Order
17-02-2024
Order
17-02-2024
Order
17-02-2024
Order
17-02-2024
Order

Summary The Munsiff court partially allowed the injunction petition (IA 2/2023) and allowed the defendant's counter-petition (IA 6/2024), confining the injunction to a 10-foot width of the disputed accessway instead of the plaintiff's claimed 12 feet. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case of easement rights but prioritized the defendant's greater irreparable injury from halting construction already begun with proper permits, conditioning any final judgment against the defendant on removal of constructed portions at their own expense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Munsiff court partially allowed the injunction petition (IA 2/2023) and allowed the defendant's counter-petition (IA 6/2024), confining the injunction to a 10-foot width of the disputed accessway instead of the plaintiff's claimed 12 feet. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case of easement rights but prioritized the defendant's greater irreparable injury from halting construction already begun with proper permits, conditioning any final judgment against the defendant on removal of constructed portions at their own expense. 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, Parappanagadi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case