Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 39 /2021

Case between Pratheeksha Kuries and Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs Sweety Roshit et al regarding default dismissal

Court
Court of Munsiff, Ernakulam
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany.
Order Date
2025-03-04
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff is Pratheeksha Kuries and Investments Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Chairman, Anson K Maliakkal. The defendants are Sweety Roshit and Roshit A K. The case was dismissed due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit for default because the plaintiff did not appear or provide representation.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit for default because the plaintiff did not appear or provide representation.
Key Reasoning:
Why Defendant Won:
Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

Hence suit is dismissed for default. All interim orders stand vacated.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Pratheeksha Kuries and Investments Pvt. Ltd.
Relation
represented by its Chairman
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sweety Roshit
Party Age
38
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Roshit A K
Party Age
46
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Paul Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
A T James
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
E A Thankappan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K G Jithu Jagannath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K P Gopi
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
Suit dismissed for default due to absence of the plaintiff.
Evidence:
Satisfied that plaintiff is not interested to proceed with suit. 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 Pratheeksha Kuries and Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs Sweety Roshit et al regarding default dismissal
Case Code Year
Case between Pratheeksha Kuries and Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs Sweety Roshit et al regarding default dismissal

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won