Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
EP.No 56/ 2023 IN OS No. 162/2021

Case between Abdul Semeen vs Madisha et al regarding execution of decree.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Judge
Sri. ARAVIND.P, MUNSIFF
Order Date
2025-09-16
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The decree holder Abdul Semeen is seeking execution of a decree against the judgment debtors, Madisha and Unni. The court dismissed the execution petition due to the absence of the decree holder and failure to produce necessary documents.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The execution petition has been dismissed due to the absence of the decree holder and the failure to produce necessary documents.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Execution Petition
Final Judgment
No
The execution petition has been dismissed due to the absence of the decree holder and the failure to produce necessary documents.
Key Reasoning:
The execution petition was dismissed as no steps were taken by the decree holder and required documents were not produced.
Why Defendant Won:
The execution petition was dismissed as no steps were taken by the decree holder and required documents were not produced.
Supporting Evidence
The execution petition was dismissed as no steps were taken by the decree holder and required documents were not produced.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence the Execution Petition is dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Abdul Semeen
Party Age
78
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Madisha
Party Age
52
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Unni
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. N. Jain
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Execution Petition was dismissed for default.
Evidence:
Hence the Execution Petition is dismissed for default.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Encumbering Certificate
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Not produced during the execution petition hearing.
Reference:
Document Type: Valuation certificate
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Not produced during the execution petition hearing.
Reference:
Document Type: Draft Sale Proclamation
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Not produced during the execution petition hearing.
Reference:
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Court proceedings mentioned lack of appearance and steps taken.
Reference:

Case Classification

Case Type
Execution Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Abdul Semeen vs Madisha et al regarding execution of decree.
Case Code Year
Case between Abdul Semeen vs Madisha et al regarding execution of decree.

Quick Facts

Location
Varkala
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Canara Bank, Kadakkavoor Branch vs Mani. C., @ Mani Achari et al regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Sameer. S et al regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Canara Bank, Varkala Branch vs Jeevanlal et al regarding Execution Petition
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Anilkumar vs Bindhu regarding execution petition
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Execution Petition Defendant Won
Case between Udha vs Chandramgathan et al regarding execution of decree.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Execution Petition Plaintiff Won