Case Summary
The case involves a petition filed by Bijan Sadanandan requesting time to file an application to reopen evidence. The petition was dismissed as the court stated that the application could be filed by the counsel.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Unknown
Final Judgment
No
The petition to reopen evidence was dismissed with costs.
Key Reasoning:
The petition was deemed unnecessary as the application could be filed by the counsel.
The petition was deemed unnecessary as the application could be filed by the counsel.
Why Defendant Won:
The petition was deemed unnecessary as the application could be filed by the counsel.
The petition was deemed unnecessary as the application could be filed by the counsel.
Supporting Evidence
the petition to reopen the evidence can even be filed by the learned counsel himself, thus there is no purpose in giving adjournment for filing the petition to reopen the evidence.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result this petition is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Bijan Sadanandan
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Viji Das
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Abhishek.S.V
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Asha. K.I
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioner sought time for filing an application to reopen evidence.
Evidence:
In the result this petition is dismissed with costs
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Unknown
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.
Case Code Year
2018