Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 1085/2023

Case between Dr. K R Antony vs Mary Tissan, Tissan Joseph Thachankary regarding civil suit

Court
II Additional Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi. K. Dinamany
Order Date
2024-11-19
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Dr. K R Antony filed a suit against Mary Tissan and Tissan Joseph Thachankary. The case was dismissed due to the plaintiff's continued absence and lack of representation.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence. The court found that the plaintiff is not interested in proceeding.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence. The court found that the plaintiff is not interested in proceeding.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the court is satisfied that the plaintiff is not interested to proceed further with the suit. Hence suit is dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Dr. K R Antony
Party Age
70
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mary Tissan
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Tissan Joseph Thachankary
Party Age
59
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Tinu Treasa M G
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Satish Murthi
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Umadevi M
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Muraleedharan P
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Lal K Joseph
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Anzil Salim
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Luxy T A
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Akash George
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Snita Rose Benjamin
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sanjay Sellen
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Adithya S Puthezhath
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
Suit dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence.
Evidence:
Hence suit is 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 Dr. K R Antony vs Mary Tissan, Tissan Joseph Thachankary regarding civil suit
Case Code Year
Case between Dr. K R Antony vs Mary Tissan, Tissan Joseph Thachankary regarding civil suit

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Fri, 11/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sat, 11/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won