O.S No. 83/2025

Case between Mubineez Ali vs Aravind Shanker et al regarding suit dismissal.

Court

THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM

Judge

Sri. Rohit Nandakumar

Order Date

2025-06-28

Duration

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Mubineez Ali, filed a suit against defendants Aravind Shanker and Pranav P. V. The court dismissed the suit against one defendant due to lack of action and stated that the defendant is a necessary party.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won

Interim Order

The suit was dismissed against the first defendant due to no steps being taken despite multiple opportunities. The second defendant was acknowledged as necessary.

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

The suit was dismissed against the first defendant due to no steps being taken despite multiple opportunities. The second defendant was acknowledged as necessary.

Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Why Defendant Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence suit dismissed. I.A 2/25 dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Mubineez Ali
Party Age: 36
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Aravind Shanker
Party Age: 35
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Pranav P. V
Party Age: 36
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: B. Deepak
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Karthik Bhavadasan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sayoojia Surendran
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sangeetha T. R
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Injunction

Outcome: Set Aside

Description:

Ad interim injunction granted therefore vacated.

Evidence:

Ad interim injunction granted therefore vacated.

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Dismissed