Case Summary
This case involves a dispute where the plaintiff, M/s Sunpaul Properties Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit against the defendant, M/s Bauer Engineers & Elevators. The court rejected the plaint due to failure to remit the balance court fee.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's failure to remit the balance court fee despite being given time.
Key Reasoning:
Plaint rejected due to non-compliance with court fee requirements.
Plaint rejected due to non-compliance with court fee requirements.
Why Defendant Won:
Plaint rejected due to non-compliance with court fee requirements.
Plaint rejected due to non-compliance with court fee requirements.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff represented. Balance Court Fee not remitted inspite of giving time.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence plaint is rejected Under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- M/s Sunpaul Properties Pvt. Ltd.
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s Bauer Engineers & Elevators
- Relation
- Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Bharath Murali
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Manu Nair G
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Plaint was rejected due to non-remittance of balance court fee.
Evidence:
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 Sunpaul Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs M/s Bauer Engineers & Elevators regarding plaint rejection
Case Code Year
Case between M/s Sunpaul Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs M/s Bauer Engineers & Elevators regarding plaint rejection