Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS 91/2024

Case between RAMLA vs SUBAIR regarding Advocate commissioner appointment

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Judge
Sri. Yadukrishnan. B
Order Date
2025-12-09
Duration
Case Code No.
91
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Ramla is seeking the appointment of an Advocate commissioner to record her evidence as she is bedridden after surgery. Subair, the respondent, has objections based on family disputes and does not wish to enter her home.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The petition for appointment of an Advocate commissioner is allowed with certain conditions for cooperation between the parties during evidence recording.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Advocate commissioner appointed to record evidence at plaintiff's residence.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for appointment of an Advocate commissioner is allowed with certain conditions for cooperation between the parties during evidence recording.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The petitioner is bedridden, and the court established the need for an Advocate commissioner to take her evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The petitioner is bedridden, and the court established the need for an Advocate commissioner to take her evidence.
Supporting Evidence
This is admitted by the respondent in his counter. Since, the Code of Civil Procedure has a provision to record the evidence through the Advocate commissioner, the same has to be adhered by both parties.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, IA 3/2025 is allowed and for C.R. on 15.12.2025.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
RAMLA
Party Age
56
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
SUBAIR
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Medical Certificate
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. P. Balagopalan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Mini. K. Koyeri
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. P. Arunkumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. M. Siju
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Ranjith Kumar. P. P
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Adv. U. V. Pradeepan
Appearance Type
Government Pleader

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Petition allowed to appoint an Advocate commissioner to record the evidence of the plaintiff at her residence.
Evidence:
Hence, the petition is allowed on the basis of following conditions.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Medical Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court accepted the Medical Certificate to establish that the plaintiff is bedridden after surgery.
Reference:

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2024

Quick Facts

Location
Nadapuram
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Nadapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between CHANDRAN vs SECRETARY et al regarding petition dismissal for default
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between N. P. PADMAKUMAR et al vs KASTHURIKUNI MOIDU HAJI et al regarding reopening evidence.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between KOMBIYULLATHIL THAZHAKUNIYIL ALTHAF vs KURUNNAM VEETTIL ABDULLA et al regarding issuance of summons
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Meethale Arayammal Ismayil vs Kokkandiyeri Mahamood regarding setting aside of an ex parte decree.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between JANU vs BAHULEYAN @ BABU regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, NADAPURAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won