Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1154/2017

Case between Abdul Habeeb vs Ali Asgar, Shabeenath Beevi regarding compromise petition

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-03-15
Duration
approximately-7 years 4 months
Case Code No.
1154
Case Closed
Sat, 03/15/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Abdul Habeeb filed a suit against Ali Asgar and Shabeenath Beevi. The court heard the case and accepted a compromise petition, leading to a judgment in favor of the compromise agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit was decreed in terms of the lawful compromise agreement between the parties.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed in terms of the lawful compromise agreement between the parties.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The terms of the compromise were found to be lawful.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The terms of the compromise were found to be lawful.
Supporting Evidence
The terms of the compromise found to be lawful.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Abdul Habeeb
Party Age
43
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ali Asgar
Party Age
40
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Shabeenath Beevi
Party Age
41
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Arun I. Sreedhar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Bilahari. G.R
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.M. Anil Prasad
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Meera.G
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.
Evidence:
Hence, the suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Compromise petition
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The terms of the compromise were found to be lawful and the suit is decreed in terms of the compromise agreement.
Reference:
IA 10/2025

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2017

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Wed, 11/15/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 03/15/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won