Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 1248/2023

Case between M/s Canara Bank vs Sajitha Pareeth regarding court fee remittance

Court
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany
Order Date
2025-10-23
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M/s Canara Bank filed a suit against Sajitha Pareeth regarding the remittance of court fees. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to the rejection of the plaint.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and failure to remit the balance court fee.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and failure to remit the balance court fee.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure due to the absence of the plaintiff.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure due to the absence of the plaintiff.
Supporting Evidence
The plaint was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure due to the absence of the plaintiff and no balance court fee.

Judgment Evidence:

Plaintiff absent no representation. No Balance Court Fee seen remitted. Hence plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M/s Canara Bank
Relation
represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sajitha Pareeth
Party Age
49
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Balance Court Fee remitted on 16/10
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
B Jayaprakash
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Thressia Anu P J
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Suja R Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Renju John
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure.
Evidence:
Plaintiff absent no representation. No Balance Court Fee seen remitted. Hence plaint is rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure.

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 M/s Canara Bank vs Sajitha Pareeth regarding court fee remittance
Case Code Year
Case between M/s Canara Bank vs Sajitha Pareeth regarding court fee remittance

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 10/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India vs Ms. Beena Joseph regarding the suit for relief.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. vs S Francis regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between State Bank of India et al vs Baiju P.J regarding dismissal of suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank) vs Vineesh Kumar TV et al regarding Settlement of Dispute
Court of Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Abdul Sattar vs Sudarshana Shenoy et al regarding Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Defendant Won