Case Summary
Restoration petition filed by petitioner was allowed upon payment of costs to each respondent.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Allowance of restoration petition
Case Type
Restoration Petition
Final Judgment
No
The petition was allowed on payment of costs to each respondent.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Supporting Evidence
Not mentioned
Judgment Evidence:
Petition stands allowed on payment of cost of Rs.2500/- to each respondent. For payment. Cost paid. IA allowed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Eengapadalil Kadeeja
- Party Age
- 1
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chenganakkattil Abdurahman
Plaintiffs Documents
Not mentioned
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.K.Moosakutty
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Advocate appearing for Chenganakkattil Abdurahman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Restoration Petition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Restoration petition allowed upon payment of costs to each respondent.
Evidence:
Petition stands allowed on payment of cost of Rs.2500/- to each respondent. For payment. Cost paid. IA allowed.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Restoration Petition
Category
Case Restoration and Delays
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Eengapadalil Kadeeja vs Chenganakkattil Abdurahman regarding restoration petition
Case Code Year
Case between Eengapadalil Kadeeja vs Chenganakkattil Abdurahman regarding restoration petition