ORIGINAL SUIT No. 289 OF 2015

Case between Gopakumari vs Gopalan et al regarding Partition

Court

THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF OF TIRUR

Judge

Sri. JANKISH NARAYANAN

Order Date

2019-06-19

Duration

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Gopakumari as the plaintiff and Gopalan, Kaliyani, Shanmughan, Rajan, and others as defendants. It pertains to a suit for partition which was dismissed due to the plaintiff's absence.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Original Suit

Final Judgment

The suit for partition was dismissed due to the absence of the plaintiff.

Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff was not present for the hearing.

Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff was not present for the hearing.

Supporting Evidence

Plaintiff not present. Suit dismissed for default.

Judgment Evidence:

Suit dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Gopakumari
Party Age: 50
Relation: W/o Surendran

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Gopalan
Party Age: 68
Relation: S/o Krishnankutty

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Kaliyani
Party Age: 66
Relation: W/o Damodaran

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Shanmughan
Party Age: 52
Relation: S/o Krishnankutty

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Rajan
Party Age: 55
Relation: S/o Krishnankutty

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. Dinesh Pookkayil
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri.P.Praveen
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Smt.Sumi.O.
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Dismissed

Description:

Suit dismissed for default due to the plaintiff not being present.

Evidence: