Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No.147/2024

Case between State Bank of India et al vs Dileep Kumar.T.N. regarding court fee dispute

Court
II Additional Munsiff Court
Judge
Smt. Maneesha K Bhadran
Order Date
2024-03-26
Duration

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

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

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The plaint was rejected as the plaintiff was absent and failed to pay the balance court fee.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:

Judgment Evidence:

The plaintiff absent. No representation. Balance Court Fee not paid. Plaintiff rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

State Bank of India (Age not specified years) CEPZ, Kakkanad Branch, Ernakulam, Pin – 682 037

Defendants

Mr. Dileep Kumar.T.N. (44 years) Thoovarah House, Chengara, Pattimattom.P.O., Ernakulam, Pin – 683 562

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

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases