Case Summary
Anand Vijay is the plaintiff seeking to set aside an exparte decree against the defendant, Vimal Kumar, who has filed for condonation of delay in filing the petition. The defendant failed to defend the original suit leading to the exparte decree.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed both IA 01/2024 and RP 289/2024, denying the request to set aside the exparte decree due to insufficient evidence regarding the delay.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
There is absolutely no materials before the Court to show that the petitioner was prevented from filing a petition to set aside the exparte decree within the time prescribed.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, IA 01/2024 and RP 289/2024 are dismissed. No costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Anand Vijay
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vimal Kumar
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Alex Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Petition to condone the delay of 457 days in filing RP 289/2024
Evidence:
The delay is not at all explained. Hence IA for condoning delay is only to be dismissed.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Petition to set aside the exparte decree
Evidence:
In view of my findings on point No.1, this point does not germane for consideration.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2021