Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S.No.869/2014

Case between Prabhakaran Nair et al vs Thankappan et al regarding Restoration Petition

Court
II Additional Munsiff
Judge
Smt. Needi.K. Dinamany
Order Date
2024-09-11
Duration
Case Code No.
869
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioners, Prabhakaran Nair et al, filed a restoration petition to set aside an earlier order. The respondents, Thankappan et al, did not appear, leading to the petition being allowed in the interest of justice.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the restoration petition and restored the suit to file.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Restoration Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the restoration petition and restored the suit to file.
Why Plaintiff Won:
This court is satisfied that this petition is to be allowed in the interest of justice.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
This court is satisfied that this petition is to be allowed in the interest of justice.
Supporting Evidence
For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit this court is satisfied that this petition is to be allowed in the interest of justice.

Judgment Evidence:

Petition allowed. Suit restored to file.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Prabhakaran Nair (Late)
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Gouriamma (Late)
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Thankamani
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Murali
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Girija
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Thankappan
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Devu
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Santhosh
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Karthika
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rahul
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
T.R Ramanathan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.B Nidhinkumar
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
N.C Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
M.P Rexy
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restoration of the suit filed under Order IX Rule 9
Evidence:
this court is satisfied that this petition is to be allowed in the interest of justice.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Condonation of delay of 8 days
Evidence:
Delay of 8 days condoned.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Restoration Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2014

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 09/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Mon, 09/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Devassy alias Thomas vs V P Rajamma regarding setting aside an ex-parte decree
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Restoration Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Santhosh et al vs Sala P Paulose regarding Restoration Petition
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Restoration Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Ansari Abdul Kareem vs Greater Cochin Development Authority regarding restoration of suit
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Restoration Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Supportsages Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Binu Varghese regarding restoration of suit
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Restoration Petition Defendant Won
Case between State Bank of India vs Raj R Nath regarding restoration of ex parte decree
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Restoration Petition Defendant Won