Company

The petitioners, Ninan Daniel and his children, are seeking a succession certificate for the shares of their deceased relative, Smt. Annamma Ninan, who passed away intestate. The court examined the details of the shares and the relationships among the parties involved.

The plaintiffs, consisting of several heirs of Late P.C. Cherian, filed a suit regarding the possession of certain property. The matter was settled through mediation, and the defendants agreed to hand over possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiffs.

Mahesh K P is the decree holder who filed a restoration petition. The court dismissed the petition due to the absence of the petitioner.

The case involves a decree holder, EMART, filing an execution petition against the judgment debtors, Mohammed Sherif and Bajaj Finance Ltd. The court considered the petition and decided to close it due to lack of steps taken.

Balakrishnan V filed an Execution Petition against Sigs Tech Marketing Pvt. Ltd. and its directors. The case was about the enforcement of a decree, but the decree holder was not represented in court.

Rajila V, represented by Chandrasekharan P, filed an execution petition against Sigs Tech Marketing Pvt Ltd and its directors. The decree holder was absent during the hearing.

Chandrasekharan P is the petitioner and decree holder in an execution petition against Sigs Tech Marketing Pvt Ltd and others. The court ordered the closure of the execution petition due to the decree holder not being represented and defects not being cured.

Chandrasekharan P is the petitioner seeking execution against Sigs Tech Marketing Pvt Ltd and its directors. The execution petition was heard and closed due to the decree holder not being represented.

M/s. Nirmal Associates filed a petition under section 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure for execution against M/s. Bajaj Appliances Limited and its directors. The respondents did not enter an appearance during the hearing.

M/s.Polaris Associates, represented by its proprietor Mani V, has filed a suit against M/s.HSIL Ltd. and other defendants for the realization of money due to losses incurred from defective products. The plaintiff alleges that service issues and defective products from the defendants have caused significant financial damage.