Case Summary
The plaintiffs, led by Antony P.M and including several others, brought a case against the defendants, including Madhu Subramanian. The case was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of evidence.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The case was dismissed for default due to the absence of the plaintiff and failure to file necessary evidence. The related case, OS. 255/2018, was also dismissed for default.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to appear in court and did not submit any evidence.
The plaintiff failed to appear in court and did not submit any evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to appear in court and did not submit any evidence.
The plaintiff failed to appear in court and did not submit any evidence.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff absent. No proof affidavit seen filed. Sought time for evidence since there is change in vakalath. However, vakalath of the plaintiff is not seen relinquished and no fresh vakalath seen filed.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence, suit was dismissed for default. Defendant who is the plaintiff in connected case OS. 255/2018 as absent, not represented. No proof affidavit seen filed. Hence, OS. 255/2018 is also dismissed for default.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Antony P.M
- Party Age
- 72
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Elizabeth Antony
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Teresa Mini Raymond
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ann Mary K.S
- Party Age
- 15
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Stanley Joseph
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Madhu Subramanian
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kajattin
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hyggin
- Party Age
- 66
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Shibi A
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Gayathri A.L
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K.C.Charles
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- E.N.Harimenon
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Renju A.T
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Poly Mathai
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Denny Varghese
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of readiness for evidence.
Evidence:
Hence, suit is dismissed for default.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
The connected case OS. 255/2018 was also dismissed for default.
Evidence:
Hence, OS. 255/2018 is also dismissed for default.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Antony P.M et al vs Madhu Subramanian et al regarding dismissal for default
Case Code Year
Case between Antony P.M et al vs Madhu Subramanian et al regarding dismissal for default