Case Summary
Paruthikkunnan Moideen Haji filed a suit for fixation of boundary and injunction. Both the plaintiff and defendants were absent during the hearing.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Original Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed for default due to the absence of both parties. The plaintiff's counsel reported no instruction.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Suit dismissed for default.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Paruthikkunnan Moideen Haji
- Party Age
- 64
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Pathumma
- Party Age
- 67
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Muhammed
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Pathumma
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nafeesa
- Party Age
- 43
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Safiya
- Party Age
- 41
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V.Chandrasekharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.M.K.Moosakutty
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
Suit for fixation of boundary and injunction.
Evidence:
Suit dismissed for default.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Original Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Paruthikkunnan Moideen Haji vs Pathumma et al regarding fixation of boundary and injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Paruthikkunnan Moideen Haji vs Pathumma et al regarding fixation of boundary and injunction