Rubeena vs Nisam — 3600002/2024
Case under Dr. Rajendra Central Agricultural University Act, 2016 Section 12. Status: For evidence. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.
MC - MISCELLANEOUS CASE
CNR: KLTR360000162024
Next Hearing
23rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
09-01-2024
Filing Number
360014/2024
Filing Date
10-01-2024
Registration No
3600002/2024
Registration Date
15-01-2024
Court
Gramanyayalaya, Mathilakam
Judge
1-Nyayadhikari ,Gram Nyayalaya Mathilakam
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rubeena
Adv. Jafarghan.U. K
Muhammad Sayan
Adv. Jafarghan.U. K,Jafarghan.U. K
Muhammed Masim
Adv. Jafarghan.U. K,Jafarghan.U. K
Respondent(s)
Nisam
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Nyayadhikari ,Gram Nyayalaya Mathilakam
For evidence
No sitting notified
for evidence.
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-05-2026 | For evidence |
| 22-05-2026 | No sitting notified |
| 27-04-2026 | for evidence. |
| 18-03-2026 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
| 16-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 3600002/2024 Petitioners: Rubeena, Muhammad Sayan, and Muhammed Masim Respondent: Nisam Court: Gram Nyayalayam (Village Court), Mathilakam, Eriyad Date: March 16, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED Nisam (respondent/husband) filed this application under CPC Section 151 seeking permission for himself, his elderly mother, and their children to meet Rubeena (petitioner/wife). The court found it lacked jurisdiction to grant such relief, as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 25(2) does not authorize the issuance of visitation orders regarding child meetings. The court determined that no specific provision of law empowers it to issue the requested order, and therefore dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 3600002/2024 Petitioners: Rubeena, Muhammad Sayan, and Muhammed Masim Respondent: Nisam Court: Gram Nyayalayam (Village Court), Mathilakam, Eriyad Date: March 16, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED Nisam (respondent/husband) filed this application under CPC Section 151 seeking permission for himself, his elderly mother, and their children to meet Rubeena (petitioner/wife). The court found it lacked jurisdiction to grant such relief, as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act Section 25(2) does not authorize the issuance of visitation orders regarding child meetings. The court determined that no specific provision of law empowers it to issue the requested order, and therefore dismissed the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts