Case Summary
Safiya filed a suit for declaration against Noushad, Thajudheen, and Aneesha. The court found that the suit was rejected due to the plaintiff's failure to pay the court fee and lack of representation.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was rejected due to lack of balance court fee and absence of the plaintiff during the hearing. The case was pronounced ex parte.
Key Reasoning:
The suit was rejected due to procedural deficiencies.
The suit was rejected due to procedural deficiencies.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
No Balance Court fee paid. No representation for plaintiff.
Judgment Evidence:
Suit is rejected u/o VII Rule 11.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Safiya
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Noushad
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thajudheen
- Party Age
- 34
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aneesha
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. N.Gopinathan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.A.Mamu
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt.K.P.Mariyama
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Suit is one for declaration.
Evidence:
Suit is rejected u/o VII Rule 11.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Safiya vs Noushad et al regarding declaration
Case Code Year
Case between Safiya vs Noushad et al regarding declaration