Case Summary
The plaintiff, Canara Bank, represented by its branch manager, filed a suit against the defendants. The suit was rejected due to the plaintiff's absence and failure to remit balance court fees.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the suit due to the plaintiff's absence and non-remittance of court fees.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Suit is rejected.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Canara Bank
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Justin K Kizhakkel
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M K Kuriachan
- Party Age
- 59
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Court fees.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Clarenenss Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Adv. Nrupen Vadakken
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Suit is rejected.
Evidence:
Balance court fees not remitted. Suit is rejected.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Canara Bank vs Justin K Kizhakkel et al regarding rejection of suit.
Case Code Year
Case between Canara Bank vs Justin K Kizhakkel et al regarding rejection of suit.