Case Summary
Union Bank of India is the plaintiff represented by its branch manager Binoy Kumar Venu. The defendants include Ebenezer Thomas, Abraham Thomas, and Prince Computers. The suit was finally heard and the plaint was rejected due to the plaintiff's absence.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaintiff's absence resulted in the rejection of the plaint.
Key Reasoning:
Plaintiff was absent and did not represent their case.
Plaintiff was absent and did not represent their case.
Why Defendant Won:
Plaintiff was absent and did not represent their case.
Plaintiff was absent and did not represent their case.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff absent. No representation by counsel.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence plaint is rejected.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Union Bank of India
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ebenezer Thomas
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abraham Thomas
- Party Age
- 57
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prince Computers
- Relation
- Proprietor: Ebenezer Thomas
Plaintiffs Documents
Nil
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Clareness Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Plaint is rejected due to absence of the plaintiff and no representation by counsel.
Evidence:
Hence plaint is rejected.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2024