Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1895/2022

Case between Alappuzha Anantha Narayanapuram Thuravoor Thirumala Devaswom vs S.Venugopal regarding rejection of plaint

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri.Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-06-19
Duration
Case Code No.
1895
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves a suit filed by Alappuzha Anantha Narayanapuram Thuravoor Thirumala Devaswom against S.Venugopal. The court rejected the plaint due to failure to remit the balance court fee.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The plaint was rejected due to the lack of remittance of the balance court fee. No application was filed by the plaintiff.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaint was rejected due to the lack of remittance of the balance court fee. No application was filed by the plaintiff.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Supporting Evidence
The court found that no balance court fee was remitted and no application was filed.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Alappuzha Anantha Narayanapuram Thuravoor Thirumala Devaswom
Relation
represented by its President
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
S.Venugopal
Party Age
57
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.G.S. Sanal Kumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Bijulal.P
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.K. Sudheesachandran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.B. Baburajan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint is rejected due to lack of remittance of balance court fee.
Evidence:
No balance court fee seen remitted. No application seen filed. Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2022

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 06/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Temple

Similar Cases

Case between Chempazhanthy Asharivilakam Sree Bhadrakalimandramoorthy Temple Family Trust et al vs Kuttan Asari et al regarding dismissal for default.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple Trust vs Government of Kerala et al regarding a civil suit
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Rajan.K. vs Syamakumar et al regarding dismissal as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Madathuvilakam Ilangam Temple et al vs Rajan et al regarding settlement scheme and injunction
Principal Munsiff Court
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kanjiravilakom Devi Temple et al vs State of Kerala et al regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won