Case Summary
The case involves Zodiac Advertisers as the plaintiff seeking to establish jurisdiction in a suit against A One Milk Products (P) Ltd and its directors regarding a dispute over money owed for goods delivered. The defendants contended that the suit should be dismissed due to jurisdictional issues.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition by the defendants to dismiss the suit was denied, as the court found that it had jurisdiction to hear the case based on where the cause of action arose.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court concluded it had jurisdiction since the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction as per the laws applicable.
The court concluded it had jurisdiction since the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction as per the laws applicable.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The court is satisfied that there is no merit in the contention of the petitioners and this court is satisfied that this court has jurisdiction to try this suit.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, this petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Zodiac Advertisers
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- A One Milk Products (P) Ltd
- Relation
- Represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Varithamby Susheelan
- Relation
- Director
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sudha Susheelan
- Relation
- Director
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- N.Sreenivasan
- Relation
- Director
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- B.L.Prasanth
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sivaji.B.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Shahul Hameed Moopan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- T.A Niyas
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Abhijith Harindran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arun .T.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petition filed under Sections 20 and 151 of CPC was dismissed.
Evidence:
In the result, this petition is dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Invoice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The invoice details were used to establish the supply of goods and the cause of action.
Reference:
Document Type:
Written Acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The acknowledgment was signed and sealed by the managing director of the defendant company, which supports the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
The legal notice mentioned the place of delivery, reinforcing the cause of action.
Reference:
Document Type:
Counter
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
The counter filed by the defendants stiffly opposing the petition provided insights into the jurisdictional contest.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
O.S.NO.
Case Code Year
2023
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour