Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.300/2025

Case between Muhammed Kunju vs Pathumma et al regarding dismissal for default

Court
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Sumey Chandran
Order Date
2025-09-12
Duration
Case Code No.
300
Case Closed
Fri, 09/12/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Muhammed Kunju filed a suit against Pathumma and others. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed for default due to the absence of the plaintiff.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed for default due to the absence of the plaintiff.
Key Reasoning:
The dismissal occurred as the plaintiff was absent during the proceedings.
Why Defendant Won:
The dismissal occurred as the plaintiff was absent during the proceedings.
Supporting Evidence
The dismissal occurred as the plaintiff was absent during the proceedings.

Judgment Evidence:

Since plaintiff absent. Suit is dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Muhammed Kunju
Party Age
57
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Pathumma
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Haseena
Party Age
25
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Phaseela
Party Age
23
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ansi
Party Age
21
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Pathumma
Party Age
65
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P.T. Geevarghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Praju K. Paul
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K. K. Nasser
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
A. P. Paul
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
Suit is dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence.
Evidence:
Since plaintiff absent. Suit is dismissed for default.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.
Case Code Year
2025

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Case Filed
Case Closed
Fri, 09/12/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between The Federal Bank Ltd. Keezhillam Branch vs Anagha Mariya Siby et al regarding suit dismissal
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Ameena Makkar et al vs Aji et al regarding Suit dismissal for default
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Binojkumar Nair vs Jitha Gopi et al regarding Suit rejection under order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C.
The Munsiff Court of Perumbavoor
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Union Bank of India, Perumbavoor Branch vs Shihab K A regarding Suit not pressed
THE MUNSIFF COURT OF PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Prakash V vs Chummar et al regarding Suit Rejection under Order 7 Rule 11
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Defendant Won