Case Summary
Case involves Anoop P H and others as plaintiffs, Sadique and others as defendants. The suit became infructuous due to the license period being over.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Case
Final Judgment
No
Suit dismissed as infructuous since the license period was over.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Plaintiff absent. Counsel submitted that license period is over. Hence, the suit became infructuous. Defendant present. Since the suit became infructuous, suit dismissed as infructuous.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Anoop P H
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- S/o. Hassankunju
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jamshad
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o. Moosa
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jithnam P Jalal
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o. Jalal
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Others
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sadique
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o. Abbas
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abbas
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- S/o.Muhammad Hajiyar
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Others
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M K Jayapalan & Neepa Narayanan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- G. Santhosh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Suit dismissed as infructuous
Evidence:
Since the suit became infructuous, suit dismissed as infructuous.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Case
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Anoop P H et al vs Sadique et al regarding License period
Case Code Year
Case between Anoop P H et al vs Sadique et al regarding License period