Abiraham Thobiyas vs Vinu Kumar — 88/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 25th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKK080000962024
Filing Number
111/2024
Filing Date
07-06-2024
Registration No
88/2024
Registration Date
19-09-2024
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram
Judge
3-Additional District Munsif
Decision Date
25th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Abiraham Thobiyas
Adv. P. Johnsilin Saviourraj
Respondent(s)
Vinu Kumar
parameswari
Adv. Adv. Sundar R. Sajeev
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Additional District Munsif
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 17-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 08-04-2026 | Judgement |
| 24-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract, having issued a legal notice 20 months after the agreement date and 9 months after the contractual deadline. Additionally, the court determined the agreement was primarily for a loan transaction (Rs. 90,000) rather than a genuine property sale, and rejected the suit due to the plaintiff's fraudulent insertion of alternative relief claims in the pleadings without court authorization. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract, having issued a legal notice 20 months after the agreement date and 9 months after the contractual deadline. Additionally, the court determined the agreement was primarily for a loan transaction (Rs. 90,000) rather than a genuine property sale, and rejected the suit due to the plaintiff's fraudulent insertion of alternative relief claims in the pleadings without court authorization. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts