Case Summary
Plaintiff Suhara filed a suit for injunction against defendants Fathima and K.P.Kareem. However, the suit was dismissed as the plaintiff was absent and had no legal representation.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Unknown
Case Type
Civil Suit - Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The suit for injunction filed by the plaintiff was dismissed due to the absence of the plaintiff and lack of legal representation.
Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Why Defendant Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
The counsel for plaintiff submitted that he has no instruction from his client. Name of plaintiff is called absent. No representation. Hence the suit is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Suhara
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- W/o. Vilakkathara Ali
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Fathima
- Party Age
- 44
- Relation
- W/o. Chekidapurath Muhammed
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- K.P.Kareem
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- S/o. Choorakuzhiyil Bappu
Plaintiffs Documents
Unknown
Defendants Documents
Unknown
Advocates
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Unknown
Description:
Plaintiff sought injunction relief.
Evidence:
The counsel for plaintiff submitted that he has no instruction from his client. Name of plaintiff is called absent. No representation. Hence the suit is dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit - Injunction
Category
Injunction and Access Rights
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Suhara vs Fathima et al regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Suhara vs Fathima et al regarding injunction