Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 659/2019

Case between Cascade Revenue Management Pvt. Ltd. vs Mohammed Haaris et al regarding suit dismissal.

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2024-07-30
Duration
approximately-5 years 4 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Cascade Revenue Management Pvt. Ltd., is involved in a legal matter against three defendants. The case has been dismissed due to the plaintiff's failure to take necessary steps against the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiff did not take necessary steps against the defendants despite several chances. All pending interim applications were also closed.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to act upon the court's orders and did not proceed with the case against the defendants.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence suit dismissed. All pending I.A’s stands closed.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Cascade Revenue Management Pvt. Ltd. (Age not specified years) Unit No. 504, 5 th Floor, World Trade Centre Kochi. Infopark Kochi-Phase 1 SEZ, Kusumagiri P.O, Kakkanad, Kochi – 682 030

Defendants

Mohammed Haaris (Age not specified years) #522/1, 2 nd Cross, 1 st Stage, Near Bawa Medicals, Rajiv Nagar, Mysore -570 019 Med Curative LLC (Age not specified years) 2730 South St. Peters Pkwy, Suite # 301, St. Peters, MO 63303, United States Sandesh Suyavanshi (Age not specified years) M I G 71, Tajnagri, Pradesh, Agra, PIN – 282 004

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The suit was dismissed due to lack of action taken against the defendants.
Evidence:
Hence suit dismissed.

Documents & Evidence

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Tue, 07/30/2019 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases