Case Summary
The South Indian Bank filed a suit against Cadenza Creations for balance court fee issues. The plaintiff was absent during the court hearing.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was rejected due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation, and balance court fee not being remitted.
Key Reasoning:
Plaintiff was absent, leading to the rejection of the case.
Plaintiff was absent, leading to the rejection of the case.
Why Defendant Won:
Plaintiff was absent, leading to the rejection of the case.
Plaintiff was absent, leading to the rejection of the case.
Supporting Evidence
Balance Court Fee not remitted. Plaintiff absent. No representation.
Judgment Evidence:
Suit rejected Under order 7, Rule 11.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- South Indian Bank
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Cadenza Creations
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P V Mathews
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Reji Jacob
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P K Shaju
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Suit rejected Under order 7, Rule 11.
Evidence:
Suit rejected Under order 7, Rule 11.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between South Indian Bank vs Cadenza Creations regarding balance court fee
Case Code Year
Case between South Indian Bank vs Cadenza Creations regarding balance court fee