Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S.No. 663/2014

Case between V P Rajamma vs Devassy alias Thomas regarding restoration of suit

Court
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi.K. Dinamany
Order Date
2025-04-08
Duration
approximately-1 year 26 days

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

V P Rajamma sought to restore a suit dismissed for default after failing to represent on multiple occasions. The court explored whether the absence was due to willful negligence and decided to allow the restoration request based on valid reasons.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court allowed the restoration petition on the grounds that the plaintiff's failure to represent was not willful and set aside the order dismissing the suit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Restoration of dismissed suit on costs of Rs.2,000/-
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found valid reasons for the plaintiff's absence and determined that there were sufficient grounds for restoring the suit.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, 1) The above petition is allowed on costs of Rs.2,000/-. Order dated 23.03.2024 dismissing the above suit for default is set aside and suit restored to file.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

V P Rajamma (Age not specified years) Vallasserry House, Chittoor Desom, Cheranelloor Village, Kanayannur Taluk

Defendants

Devassy alias Thomas (Age not specified years) Kunnikkal House, Chittoor Desom, Cheranelloor Village, Kanayannur Taluk

Reliefs

Relief Type: Restoration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Restoration of the suit dismissed for default.
Evidence:
In light of the above discussion I am satisfied that the above petition is liable to be allowed.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Compensation for inconvenience caused to the respondent by way of costs.
Evidence:
But for the inconvenience caused to respondent is to be adequately compensated by way of costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The plaintiff purchased the property as per this document and is seeking boundary fixation.
Reference:
Sale Deed No.2000/1990
Document Type: Commissioner Report
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Requested the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to measure the property.
Reference:
I.A. No.7070/2014
Document Type: Commissioner Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The court's appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to assist in measuring the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Oral evidence
Relevance:
Hearing of both sides and perusal of records.
Reference:

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases