Indira Vasudeva Menon vs Gayathri Mehtha — 300146/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26OVIIR1. Status: Listed to. Next hearing: 20th May 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLPK210002222016
Next Hearing
20th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
300198/2016
Filing Date
26-03-2016
Registration No
300146/2016
Registration Date
30-03-2016
Court
Munsiff Court, Chittur
Judge
1-Munsiff
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Indira Vasudeva Menon
Adv. V.Jayadeva Narayanan
Narayanan Kutty (Supplemental)
Usha devi (supplemental)
Kesavankutty (supplemental)
Satyapalan (Supplemental)
Premandan (Supplemental)
Respondent(s)
Gayathri Mehtha
Pulimannam NSS Karayogam,
Pulimannam N.S.S Karayogam
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Munsiff
Listed to
Orders in IA
Orders in IA
Orders in IA
For hearing on IA
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-04-2026 | Listed to | |
| 04-04-2026 | Orders in IA | |
| 30-03-2026 | Orders in IA | |
| 27-03-2026 | Orders in IA | |
| 26-03-2026 | For hearing on IA |
Interim Orders
Summary: The suit for boundary fixation and injunction filed by Indira Vasudeva Menon (plaintiff) was allowed and decreed. The court fixed the boundaries of the disputed property on all four sides (northern through AB line, southern through DC line, eastern through BC line, and western through AD line) based on the plaintiff's unchallenged testimony and documentary evidence. The defendants, who failed to appear and present counter-evidence, were ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The suit for boundary fixation and injunction filed by Indira Vasudeva Menon (plaintiff) was allowed and decreed. The court fixed the boundaries of the disputed property on all four sides (northern through AB line, southern through DC line, eastern through BC line, and western through AD line) based on the plaintiff's unchallenged testimony and documentary evidence. The defendants, who failed to appear and present counter-evidence, were ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs of suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts