Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No. 347/2019

Case between Midhilan vs Vinod P.S. et al regarding realisation of money

Court
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Judge
Smt. Sofia.T.A.
Order Date
2025-07-01
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Midhilan has filed a suit for the realisation of money against several defendants. The case was heard before the Additional Munsiff on July 1, 2025.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found both parties absent. The plaintiff's case was rejected due to non-remittance of required fees.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found both parties absent. The plaintiff's case was rejected due to non-remittance of required fees.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to provide necessary documentation and representation.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to provide necessary documentation and representation.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff failed to provide necessary documentation and representation.

Judgment Evidence:

Both side absent, represented. Counsel submitted that no instruction from the plaintiff. BCF not remitted. Plaint rejected.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Midhilan
Party Age
32
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vinod P.S.
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rejithakumari
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Adabiya Beevi
Party Age
55
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Indira
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Anjali
Party Age
24
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
E.Shanavaskhan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Vinayachandran.V.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Dhanya A.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
G.Gopakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Bossini Bose
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Realisation of money
Evidence:
Both side absent, represented. Counsel submitted that no instruction from the plaintiff. BCF not remitted. Plaint rejected.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Midhilan vs Vinod P.S. et al regarding realisation of money
Case Code Year
Case between Midhilan vs Vinod P.S. et al regarding realisation of money

Quick Facts

Location
Kollam
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Vijayendran, Chithra vs Yamunadevi regarding review of order
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Navasudeen.S vs Sira Group regarding review of an earlier order
Court of the Munsiff, Kollam
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sajeev vs T.Unnikrishna Pillai regarding setting aside an exparte decree.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Gopakumar vs K.S.Abdul Manaf regarding Realisation of Money
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM.
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Bank of India vs Shibina. S et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOLLAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won