Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1173/2022

Case between Canara Bank vs Gopakumar.I.M regarding suit dismissal for default

Court
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III COURT
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-04-10
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Canara Bank represented by its Manager filed a suit against Gopakumar.I.M. The court dismissed the suit for default as the plaintiff was absent and no representation was made.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence suit dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank
Relation
represented by its Manager, Aneesh.S, S/o Simon Das
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Gopakumar.I.M
Party Age
41
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. N.R.Rajani
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff's suit was dismissed for default due to absence.
Evidence:
Hence suit dismissed for default.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Plaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court referred to the Original Plaint filed by the Plaintiff.
Reference:
null
Document Type: Duplicate Plaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court referred to the Duplicate Plaint filed by the Plaintiff.
Reference:
null
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
The court mentioned the Commission Report during the proceedings.
Reference:
null
Document Type: Documents
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court referred to various documents submitted by the Plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1 to A6
Document Type: Vakalath
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court acknowledged the Vakalath filed by the Defendant.
Reference:
Ext.D1 to D6
Document Type: Mediation Report
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court took note of the Mediation Report submitted.
Reference:
null

Case Classification

Case Type
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Canara Bank vs Gopakumar.I.M regarding suit dismissal for default
Case Code Year
Case between Canara Bank vs Gopakumar.I.M regarding suit dismissal for default

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 04/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Aradhi Restaurant regarding rejection of plaint
Court of Principal Munsiff
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Santhosh Kumar regarding realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jayan. E et al regarding realisation of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Smt. Sheeja. N regarding plaint rejection
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won