Case Summary
Khadeeja, represented by Alavi, filed a suit seeking an injunction against Kallumottakkal Alavi. However, the plaintiff was absent during the proceedings.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Injunction
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed for default due to the absence of the plaintiff. The court noted that the plaintiff's counsel reported no instructions.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to dismissal.
The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to dismissal.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to dismissal.
The plaintiff was absent during the hearing, leading to dismissal.
Supporting Evidence
Plaintiff counsel reported no instruction. Plaintiff's name called absent.
Judgment Evidence:
Suit dismissed for default.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Khadeeja
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- W/o.
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Alavi
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kallumottakkal Alavi
- Party Age
- 68
- Relation
- S/o.
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.A.Ismail
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Gopi Kadavath
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V. Chandrasekharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Injunction
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
Suit is one for injunction, but plaintiff's name was called absent.
Evidence:
Suit dismissed for default.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Injunction
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Khadeeja vs Kallumottakkal Alavi regarding injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Khadeeja vs Kallumottakkal Alavi regarding injunction