Case Summary
Karthikeyan filed a petition to review the order rejecting his suit due to non-payment of court fees. The court found that there was significant delay in seeking the review and denied the petition.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed both IA 01/2025 and RP 82/2025, concluding that the delay in filing for review was not justified.
Key Reasoning:
The court found no valid reason for the delay in filing the review petition.
The court found no valid reason for the delay in filing the review petition.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
There is absolutely no materials before the court to show that the petitioner was prevented from filing the petition to review the order dated 27/03/2024 in time.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, IA 01/2025 and RP 82/2025 are dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Karthikeyan
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M.K. Alexander
Plaintiffs Documents
Nil
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Suba S.Pillai
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- John George
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Condonation of delay of 384 days in filing RP 82/2025
Evidence:
Hence, IA 01/2025 for condoning the delay is to be dismissed.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Restoration of the above numbered suit on file
Evidence:
In view of the finding on point No.1, this point does not germane for consideration.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Delay in filing due to financial stringency
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2020