Case Summary
B.Vinitha filed a petition regarding rent control against Shalini.A.M. The case was heard, but the petitioner was absent and the petition was dismissed.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition as the petitioner was absent and had no representation.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner was absent and no proof affidavit was filed.
The petitioner was absent and no proof affidavit was filed.
Why Defendant Won:
The petitioner was absent and no proof affidavit was filed.
The petitioner was absent and no proof affidavit was filed.
Supporting Evidence
Petitioner absent. No representation. No proof affidavit seen filed.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence petition is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- B.Vinitha
- Party Age
- 59
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shalini.A.M.
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.S.Vikraman
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Govind.V
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.V.Dinesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Sunod.V.K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Nitin.A
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
RCP.NO.
Case Code Year
2024