Commercial Suit No.161/2022

Case between M/s.Bhumi Integrated Property Management Services et al vs Dr.K.R.Sarath chandran et al regarding rejection of plaint.

Court

COURT OF THE COMMERCIAL JUDGE/ II nd ADDL. SUB JUDGE, KOZHIKODE

Judge

Smt. Vandana R

Order Date

2025-11-26

Duration

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M/s.Bhumi Integrated Property Management Services filed a commercial suit against Dr.K.R.Sarath chandran and Premjith Nair. The court rejected the plaint due to BCF not being paid.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Commercial Suit

Final Judgment

The plaint was rejected due to non-payment of BCF as stated by the court.

Key Reasoning:
Plaintiff did not fulfill the requirement of paying BCF.

Why Defendant Won:
Plaintiff did not fulfill the requirement of paying BCF.

Supporting Evidence

BCF not paid.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence plaint is rejected.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: M/s.Bhumi Integrated Property Management Services
Relation: Rep by its partner

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Dr.K.R.Sarath chandran
Party Age: 75
Relation: S/o.Late. Karunamuttath N Raghavan

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Premjith Nair
Party Age: 52
Relation: S/o.Padmanabhan Nair

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri.K.B.Sivaramakrishnan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri.Anirudh N.R
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

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

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri.M.K.Biju Roshan
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri.Akshay Kammath
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Rejected

Description:

Plaintiff's suit was rejected

Evidence:

BCF not paid. Hence plaint is rejected.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification