Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 803/2022

Case between Janish P.A. vs Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd. et al regarding dismissal for default

Court
THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2024-11-11
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Janish P.A. is the plaintiff against Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and others. The case concerns the plaintiff's continuous absence from court hearings.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit due to the plaintiff's continuous absence and lack of representation.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit due to the plaintiff's continuous absence and lack of representation.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to appear in court despite directions.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to appear in court despite directions.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff is continuously absent. Today also plaintiff remained absent, inspite of direction for appearance.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence this court is of the view that plaintiff is not interested to prosecute further. Hence suit is dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Janish P.A.
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
N.D.Joseph
Party Age
62
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.B. Vipinkumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
S. Kathik Menon
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K.R. Vinod
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
M.S. Letha
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
The suit is dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's continuous absence.
Evidence:
Hence suit is dismissed for default.

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 Janish P.A. vs Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd. et al regarding dismissal for default
Case Code Year
Case between Janish P.A. vs Kodak Mahindra Bank Ltd. et al regarding dismissal for default

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Fri, 11/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sat, 11/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Garden View Apartment owners Association vs Ansal River Dale owners Association et al regarding Restoration Petition
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Shanoj R vs Joseph Augustin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s Indo Quartz vs M/s Ray Engineering Pvt. Ltd. et al regarding petition under Order 38 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure.
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Canton Residency Pvt. Ltd. vs Kalamassery Municipality regarding dismissal of suit
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Mrs. Julie Sebastian vs SREECHAND SPECIALITY HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. regarding settlement of claims.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won