Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 161/2023

Case between Smt. Ponnamma Karunakaran vs Smt. Sindhu Selvaraj regarding dismissal of suit

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2024-12-19
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Smt. Ponnamma Karunakaran, was involved in a case against Smt. Sindhu Selvaraj. The suit was dismissed due to the plaintiff's legal heirs not being interested in proceeding and not filing a memo despite several chances.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed due to the plaintiff's lack of interest and failure to file necessary documentation.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed due to the plaintiff's lack of interest and failure to file necessary documentation.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Smt. Ponnamma Karunakaran
Party Age
92
Relation
W/o. Late Karunakaran
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Smt. Sindhu Selvaraj
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o. C.S Selvaraj
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
T.B Thankappan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
T.T Harikumar
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M. Stalin James
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K. Vidyasagar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
M.K Rajeev
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
M. Manikandan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
The case was dismissed due to lack of interest from the legal heirs to proceed.
Evidence:
Plaintiff represented. Defendant no representation. Counsel for plaintiff submits that Legal Heir’s are not interested in proceeding the case and had sought time to file memo. Despite innumerous chances memo not filed. Hence dismissed.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Smt. Ponnamma Karunakaran vs Smt. Sindhu Selvaraj regarding dismissal of suit
Case Code Year
Case between Smt. Ponnamma Karunakaran vs Smt. Sindhu Selvaraj regarding dismissal of suit

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam District
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 12/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Tue, 12/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won