Case Summary
The State Bank of India filed a suit against Dileep Kumar.T.N. However, the plaintiff was absent during the hearing, and there was no representation for them. The court rejected the plaint due to non-payment of the balance court fee.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaint was rejected as the plaintiff was absent and failed to pay the balance court fee.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
The plaintiff absent. No representation. Balance Court Fee not paid. Plaintiff rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- State Bank of India
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Dileep Kumar.T.N.
- Party Age
- 44
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V.K. Hema
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arunima.N.R
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Gowri.A.H.
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Plaint rejected due to absence of the plaintiff and non-payment of balance court fee.
Evidence:
Balance Court Fee not paid. Plaintiff rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.
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 State Bank of India et al vs Dileep Kumar.T.N. regarding court fee dispute
Case Code Year
Case between State Bank of India et al vs Dileep Kumar.T.N. regarding court fee dispute