Case Summary
The case involves Subina.K. as the Decree Holder and Hareesh as the Judgment Debtor. The Execution Petition was filed but was dismissed for default as the Decree Holder was absent.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Execution Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the Execution Petition for default due to the absence of the Decree Holder.
Key Reasoning:
The Decree Holder did not appear in court, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
The Decree Holder did not appear in court, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Why Defendant Won:
The Decree Holder did not appear in court, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
The Decree Holder did not appear in court, leading to the dismissal of the petition.
Supporting Evidence
The Decree Holder absent. No representation. No step taken. Not comply order.
Judgment Evidence:
Petition dismissed for default.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Subina.K.
- Party Age
- 27
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hareesh
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- N.R.Roy
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Injakkal.D.Pramod Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Execution Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Subina.K. vs Hareesh regarding Execution Petition
Case Code Year
Case between Subina.K. vs Hareesh regarding Execution Petition