INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No. 497 OF 2018

Case between Fathima Beevi et al vs Kunhan Bava et al regarding restoration of the suit

Court

Court of the Munsiff of Tirur

Judge

SMT. VINCY.T.V.

Order Date

2018-07-03

Duration

3 years 6 months 17 days

Case Closed

Thu, 07/12/2018 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs filed a petition to restore a suit for setting out a way and injunction that was dismissed due to non-appearance. The defendants opposed the petition, alleging intentional non-appearance by the plaintiffs.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won

Interim Order

The petition to restore the suit dismissed on 17-01-2018 was allowed conditionally with a cost of Rs.2,500 to be paid by the petitioner to the respondents.

Judgment Favored

Plaintiff

Relief Granted

Restoration of the suit with cost payment

Case Type

Civil Suit - Restoration

Final Judgment

The petition to restore the suit dismissed on 17-01-2018 was allowed conditionally with a cost of Rs.2,500 to be paid by the petitioner to the respondents.

Why Plaintiff Won:
The court allowed the petition as it found that the non-appearance of the petitioner on the trial date was due to valid reasons, and the delay in final disposal caused inconvenience to the respondents.

Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court allowed the petition as it found that the non-appearance of the petitioner on the trial date was due to valid reasons, and the delay in final disposal caused inconvenience to the respondents.

Supporting Evidence

The present petition is filed by the plaintiffs for restoration of the suit dismissed 17-01-2018. Case of the petitioners is that the second petitioner was working in a hotel at Ernakulam, and due to some urgent reasons he had to go to Ernakulam. Thus he could not appear before the court and inform that fact to his counsel. But no evidence was adduced for substantiating their contention. So, there is no material on record to show that the petitioner had any sufficient cause for non-appearance before court on 17-01-2018. Therefore, I hold a view that the petitioner failed to prove that he had any sufficient cause for his non-appearance before court on 17-01-2018.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the petition is allowed on condition to pay cost of Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) by the petitioner to the respondent on or before 12.07.2018.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Fathima Beevi
Party Age: 51
Relation: W/o. Assainar

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Dirar
Party Age: 34
Relation: S/o. Assainar

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Thesireef
Party Age: 27
Relation: S/o. Assainar

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Asoorabeevi
Party Age: 29
Relation: D/o. Assainar

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Kunhan Bava
Party Age: 62
Relation: S/o. Assainar

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Ibrahim
Party Age: 60
Relation: S/o. Assainar

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Ashraf
Party Age: 50
Relation: S/o. Assainar

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Fathima
Party Age: 40
Relation: W/o. Hameed

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Rejulamol
Party Age: 21
Relation: D/o Hameed

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Sharjila
Party Age: 20
Relation: D/o. Hameed

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Kabeer
Party Age: 16
Relation: S/o. Hameed

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Sabna
Party Age: 14
Relation: D/o. Hameed

Plaintiffs Documents

Not mentioned

Defendants Documents

Not mentioned

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. K. Vipin Chandrasekharan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. K.M. Shihab
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. Sree Raj
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Restoration of suit

Outcome: Granted

Description:

Petition allowed conditionally with cost payment

Evidence: