Case Summary
Two minor plaintiffs, represented by their grandfather, filed a money suit against the defendants. The plaintiff's counsel reported the absence of instructions, resulting in the suit being dismissed.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Dismissal of the money suit
Case Type
Money Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit for money was dismissed due to the absence of instructions from the plaintiff's counsel and the plaintiff being absent during the hearing.
Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Why Defendant Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned
Reason not clearly mentioned
Supporting Evidence
Judgment Evidence:
Suit for money. The counsel for plaintiff reported that he has no instruction from his client. Name of the plaintiff called absent. Suit is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Muhammed Marvan
- Party Age
- 15
- Relation
- Minor, Represented by Grandfather
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Danish
- Party Age
- 6
- Relation
- Minor, Represented by Grandfather
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Chengott Muhammed Kutty
- Party Age
- 49
- Relation
- S/o. Hamza
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ayisha Moothatt
- Party Age
- 35
- Relation
- W/o. Chengott Muhammed Kutty
Plaintiffs Documents
Not mentioned
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned
Advocates
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Money Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Money Suit
Case Code
Case between Muhammed Marvan et al vs Chengott Muhammed Kutty et al regarding Money Suit
Case Code Year
Case between Muhammed Marvan et al vs Chengott Muhammed Kutty et al regarding Money Suit