O.S. No. 7 0 8 /2025

Case between M/s Hobcm Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs M/s Arcus Industries et al regarding rejection of plaint

Court

MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM

Judge

Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany

Order Date

2026-01-13

Duration

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves M/s Hobcm Sales Pvt. Ltd. as the plaintiff and M/s Arcus Industries along with its partner Sakethsambi Yeevuri as defendants. The plaint filed by the plaintiff was rejected due to absence of representation and non-remittance of balance court fee.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

The plaint was rejected due to the absence of the plaintiff and non-payment of the balance court fee.

Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected on procedural grounds.

Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected on procedural grounds.

Supporting Evidence

The plaint was rejected due to the absence of the plaintiff and non-remittance of balance court fee.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence plaint is rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: M/s Hobcm Sales Pvt. Ltd.
Relation: Represented by

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: M/s Arcus Industries

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Sakethsambi Yeevuri

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: John Numpeli Junior
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Ajith V
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Daniel Jose
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Rejected

Description:

Plaint is rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Evidence: