Case Summary
The plaintiffs are Ashrath Rasheed and Subair, who have filed a suit against Ramla and Abdul Salam for the realisation of money. The court has determined that the suit is rejected due to no balance court fee being paid.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the suit due to the failure to pay the required balance court fee. The plaintiffs are unable to proceed with their claims.
Key Reasoning:
The suit was rejected due to no balance court fee being paid.
The suit was rejected due to no balance court fee being paid.
Why Defendant Won:
The suit was rejected due to no balance court fee being paid.
The suit was rejected due to no balance court fee being paid.
Supporting Evidence
No balance court fee paid. Suit rejected.
Judgment Evidence:
Suit rejected.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ashrath Rasheed
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Subair
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ramla
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abdul Salam
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Not available
Defendants Documents
Not available
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. E.M. Purushothaman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Majeed Kalappattil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Suit for realisation of money.
Evidence:
No balance court fee paid. Suit rejected.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Ashrath Rasheed et al vs Ramla et al regarding realisation of money
Case Code Year
Case between Ashrath Rasheed et al vs Ramla et al regarding realisation of money