Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.148/2022

Case between Sujith Radhakrishnan vs Krishnachandran.B et al regarding plaint rejection

Court
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-05-30
Duration
Case Closed
Fri, 05/30/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Sujith Radhakrishnan filed a suit against Krishnachandran.B and others. The court rejected the plaint due to no balance court fee being remitted.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The plaint was rejected due to non-remittance of balance court fee. The court did not receive any application regarding this matter.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaint was rejected due to non-remittance of balance court fee. The court did not receive any application regarding this matter.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Supporting Evidence
The court emphasized that no Balance Court Fee remitted.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence plaint rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sujith Radhakrishnan
Party Age
28
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Krishnachandran.B
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sumith U.Nair
Party Age
40
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sreerag.P
Party Age
28
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Divishith.P
Party Age
31
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. S. Vikraman
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. V.Dinesh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Gautham.S.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Govind.V
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Syam Krishnan.K
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. A.Ravindranath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. A.R.Remesh(D1)
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Samchandra Bose.L
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. U. Jayakrishnan(D3)
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Plaint rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Evidence:
Hence plaint rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Sujith Radhakrishnan vs Krishnachandran.B et al regarding plaint rejection
Case Code Year
Case between Sujith Radhakrishnan vs Krishnachandran.B et al regarding plaint rejection

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Fri, 05/30/2025 - 12:00
From
Thu, 05/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sat, 05/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won