Case Summary
The case involves the plaintiff Balachandran Nair filing a suit against defendants Sajeev and Prabhavathi Amma for fixation of boundary and injunction. The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and non-remittance of balance court fee.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and the lack of representation. This decision was pronounced in open court.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Hence plaint rejected u/o 7 Rule 11(c) of Code of Civil Procedure.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Balachandran Nair
- Party Age
- 61
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sajeev
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prabhavathi Amma
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Krishnan.S.Raj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- R.Ramesh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
The plaint was rejected due to balance court fee not remitted.
Evidence:
Hence plaint rejected u/o 7 Rule 11(c) of Code of Civil Procedure.
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
Case between Balachandran Nair vs Sajeev et al regarding Fixation of Boundary and Injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Balachandran Nair vs Sajeev et al regarding Fixation of Boundary and Injunction