Government

The case involves the State of Kerala and its representatives seeking to condone the delay in filing a restoration petition for a suit originally dismissed for default. The respondents have opposed the application, arguing lack of sufficient cause for the delay.

The case involves the State of Kerala and its chief chemical examiner as plaintiffs against Dr N. Kumudesan, S. Sujatha, and R. Geetha as defendants. It concerns a suit for the realization of money that was dismissed for default after a series of adjournments.

The plaintiff, S.Sreejith.IPS, an IPS Officer, is suing the defendant, K.M.Shajahan, for defamation and damages caused by scandalous statements made online. The defendant failed to appear in court, leading to a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

The plaintiffs include Kunjan, Omana, and Mohanan among others. The case was dismissed for default as the plaintiffs did not appear in court to present evidence.

K.R Lalitha is the decree holder, while the State of Kerala and the Tahasildar Kanayannur Taluk are the judgment debtors. The petition has been reported settled and closed.

Punjab National Bank is suing Raghav Mohan and his co-borrowers for repayment of an education loan. The defendants defaulted on their loan repayment, leading the plaintiff to seek recovery through this suit.

John filed a suit against the State of Kerala and its officials. The court has allowed the application and the suit has been withdrawn.

The plaintiffs are seeking recovery of possession and damages from the defendant, who has been occupying their property without authorization. The case involves the original owners and their legal heirs, asserting their title over the property.

The plaintiff, Smt. Leela Johny, leased a property from the defendant, Greater Cochin Development Authority, and is seeking to prevent the defendant from unilaterally raising the rent. The defendant contends that the rent increase is justified as per the lease agreement.

The plaintiff, G.Rajan, a retired Sub Registrar, sued the State of Kerala and other officials for the realization of interest on his withheld Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG). The defendants argued that the claim was barred by the Law of Limitation, but the court found in favor of the plaintiff.