Case Summary
The plaintiff, Sijo Joy, was absent during the hearing, and the case was represented only by the defendant, Nassar. The court dismissed the case due to lack of representation from the plaintiff.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the case as the plaintiff did not appear, leading to a lack of representation for the case.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff was absent and did not provide any representation.
The plaintiff was absent and did not provide any representation.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff was absent and did not provide any representation.
The plaintiff was absent and did not provide any representation.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff was absent and represented no counsel during the hearing.
Judgment Evidence:
I.A 6/24 and 7/24 dismissed. Case in list. No representation. Dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sijo Joy
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- V.V Joy
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nassar
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M.A Joseph Manavalan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- J Ramkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Joseph John P.J
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Babu Cherukara
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
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 Sijo Joy vs Nassar regarding Dismissal of the suit.
Case Code Year
Case between Sijo Joy vs Nassar regarding Dismissal of the suit.