Case Summary
The petitioner Ramya seeks to restore a previous restoration petition dismissed due to non-appearance. The defendants, including the Branch Manager of Dhanalekshmi Bank, raised objections regarding the maintainability of the petitions.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Restoration Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the application IA No. 01/2025 and restored RP No. 22/2025 to file.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found sufficient cause for the petitioner's delay in appearance.
The court found sufficient cause for the petitioner's delay in appearance.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found sufficient cause for the petitioner's delay in appearance.
The court found sufficient cause for the petitioner's delay in appearance.
Supporting Evidence
On going through the affidavit and the evidence adduced by the petitioner, there is sufficient cause on the part of the petitioner for non-appearance before court in time.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, IA No. 01/2025 is allowed and RP is allowed. The RP 22/2025 is restored to file.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Ramya
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Branch Manager, Dhanalekshmi Bank
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Assistant General Manager, Infrastructure Department, Dhanalekshmi Bank
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- B.N. Haskar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
IA No. 01/2025 is allowed and RP is allowed. The RP 22/2025 is restored to file.
Evidence:
In the result, IA No. 01/2025 is allowed and RP is allowed.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Restoration Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Non-appearance before court
Case Code
RP.
Case Code Year
2025