Case Summary
The case involves Bank of Baroda as the plaintiff and M/s. Fresh Foods as the defendant. The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiff was not present for ex parte evidence despite numerous chances.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled that the suit was dismissed due to the plaintiff's absence for ex parte evidence despite multiple opportunities provided.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff did not appear for the hearing, resulting in the dismissal of the case.
The plaintiff did not appear for the hearing, resulting in the dismissal of the case.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff did not appear for the hearing, resulting in the dismissal of the case.
The plaintiff did not appear for the hearing, resulting in the dismissal of the case.
Supporting Evidence
The court ruled that the plaintiff's absence led to the dismissal of the case.
Judgment Evidence:
The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiff was not present for ex parte evidence despite innumerous chances and posting as last chance.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Bank of Baroda
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s. Fresh Foods
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mr. Noufal V.A
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Saira Phiroz
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Susan Kuriakose
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Brinta Varghes
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Bank of Baroda vs M/s. Fresh Foods regarding dismissal of suit
Case Code Year
Case between Bank of Baroda vs M/s. Fresh Foods regarding dismissal of suit