ORIGINAL SUIT No. 163 OF 2015

Case between Ayisha et al vs Moideenkutty et al regarding partition

Court

Court of the Munsiff of Tirur

Judge

Smt. NIMMI.K.K.

Order Date

2018-07-13

Duration

2 years

Case Closed

Fri, 07/13/2018 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Dispute over partition where the plaintiff and defendants were not present or represented resulting in dismissal of the suit for default.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Dismissed

Relief Granted

Not Decided

Case Type

Civil Suit - Partition

Final Judgment

The suit for partition was dismissed for default as neither the plaintiffs nor defendants were present or represented.

Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available

Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Suit for partition. Plaintiff not present, not represented. Defendants not present, not represented. Posted for plaintiff's evidence. Hence suit dismissed for default. (Pronounced by me in open court, this the 13th day of July, 2018). MUNSIFF.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Ayisha
Party Age: 55
Relation: W/o Annayankottil Veettil

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Moideenkutty
Party Age: 52
Relation: S/o Kizhakkepattu veettil Abu Haji

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Muhammed
Party Age: 49
Relation: S/o Kizhakkepattu veettil Abu Haji

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Mammi
Party Age: 47
Relation: S/o Kizhakkepattu veettil Abu Haji

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Fathima
Party Age: 45
Relation: W/o Karinkappara veettil Yahutty

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Khamarunneesa
Party Age: 28
Relation: W/o Rafi

Plaintiffs Documents

Not available

Defendants Documents

Not available

Advocates

Reliefs

Relief Type: Partition

Outcome: Not Decided

Description:

Dispute over partition resulting in suit dismissal for default

Evidence:

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification