Case Summary
The case involves a petition filed by Uma Trading Company to restore a suit that had been previously dismissed. The petitioner was absent during the proceedings.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition for restoration of the suit was dismissed due to the petitioner's absence.
Key Reasoning:
Petitioner was absent and no representation was made.
Petitioner was absent and no representation was made.
Why Defendant Won:
Petitioner was absent and no representation was made.
Petitioner was absent and no representation was made.
Supporting Evidence
Petitioner absent and no representation. No steps seen taken till date.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence petition dismissed for default.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Uma Trading Company
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- T.V.Rajendran Nair
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s Karthika Trading Company
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rahul Krishnan.U.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Kiran Krishna
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
RP.NO.
Case Code Year
2025