ORIGINAL SUIT No. 2 OF 2008

Case between Adayattil Hamza et al vs Pattath Kunhimoideen et al regarding injunction

Court

Court of the Munsiff of Tirur

Judge

Smt. VINCY.T.V.

Order Date

2017-11-29

Duration

9 years

Case Closed

Wed, 11/29/2017 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Plaintiff Adayattil Hamza filed a suit seeking injunction against multiple defendants, but the suit was dismissed due to the absence of the plaintiff.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Not Decided

Case Type

Civil Suit - Injunction

Final Judgment

The suit for injunction was dismissed due to the absence of the plaintiff Adayattil Hamza.

Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Why Defendant Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence suit is dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Adayattil Hamza
Party Age: 52
Relation: S/o Mohammedali

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Pattath Kunhimoideen
Party Age: 45
Relation: S/o Koyamu

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Sulaikha
Party Age: 40
Relation: Wife of Pattath Kunhimoideen

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Mujeeb
Party Age: 20
Relation: Son of Pattath Kunhimoideen

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Veeyumma
Relation: W/o Thayyil Abu

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Ramla

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Shajida

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Maimoona

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Asma

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Chekkutty

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Rafeek

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Alavi

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Salam

Plaintiffs Documents

Power of Attorney

Defendants Documents

Performance order in IA 1453/09 and 1454/09 dated 18-7-2009

Advocates

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction

Outcome: Not Decided

Description:

Seeking injunction against the defendants

Evidence: