Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 112/2022

Case between Thilothamma vs Joshy V.S et al regarding dismissal for default

Court
The Court of the I Additional Munsiff
Judge
Sri. Padmakumar.G.
Order Date
2024-03-21
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This case involves Thilothamma as the plaintiff and Joshy V.S and Sheena as defendants. The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff not submitting proof evidence.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court ruled that the case was dismissed due to the plaintiff's failure to file necessary evidence.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled that the case was dismissed due to the plaintiff's failure to file necessary evidence.
Key Reasoning:
The court dismissed the case as the plaintiff did not provide proof evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
The court dismissed the case as the plaintiff did not provide proof evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The court dismissed the case as the plaintiff did not provide proof evidence.

Judgment Evidence:

Plaintiff evidence. No proof affidavit filed. Hence suit dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Thilothamma
Party Age
75
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Joshy V.S
Party Age
48
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sheena
Party Age
42
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.R.Vinod
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Aswin Venugopal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.S.Latha
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sreerekha K.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Kurian Marie
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Bindu K.N
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Suit dismissed for default due to no proof affidavit filed.
Evidence:
Plaintiff evidence. No proof affidavit filed. Hence suit dismissed for default.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Thilothamma vs Joshy V.S et al regarding dismissal for default
Case Code Year
Case between Thilothamma vs Joshy V.S et al regarding dismissal for default

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Fri, 03/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sun, 03/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between The Managing Director, Channel Foods Pvt Ltd vs Kotak Mahindra General Insurance regarding decree execution.
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Pradeep vs Sumesh Balakrishnan et al regarding partnership deed
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Case Unknown
Case between Pradeep vs Sumesh Balakrishnan et al regarding partnership deed
Court of Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Case Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won