Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1338/2024

Case between Chandran.D. vs Sivasubramany.K regarding suit dismissal

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-07-16
Duration
Case Closed
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Chandran.D., the plaintiff, represents Attukal Traders and is 64 years old. The defendant, Sivasubramany.K, is being sued and both parties reached a compromise, leading to the dismissal of the suit.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit as both parties filed a compromise petition indicating the matter was settled.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit as both parties filed a compromise petition indicating the matter was settled.
Key Reasoning:
The matter was settled through a compromise petition.
Why Defendant Won:
The matter was settled through a compromise petition.
Supporting Evidence
This suit is having been finally heard on 16.07.2025 and the court on the same day delivered the following judgment.

Judgment Evidence:

Accordingly suit dismissed. IA2/25 allowed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Chandran.D.
Party Age
64
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sivasubramany.K
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Vilappil S.Sivakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Shoby Joseph.Y
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The suit was dismissed based on a compromise petition stating the matter was settled.
Evidence:
IA3/25, compromise petition filed, stating matter settled hence to dismiss suit. Accordingly suit dismissed.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Interim application IA2/25 was allowed.
Evidence:
IA2/25 allowed.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Chandran.D. vs Sivasubramany.K regarding suit dismissal
Case Code Year
Case between Chandran.D. vs Sivasubramany.K regarding suit dismissal

Case Flags

Out-of-Court Settlement

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Wed, 07/16/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreedevi vs Mahesh regarding realization of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Application in Pauper Suit Defendant Won
Case between Anitha Kumari.L.K et al vs Madhu.S et al regarding an ad-interim injunction.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF- III
Injunction Plaintiff Won
Case between R.Vijayakumar vs Arun Mohan regarding possession of petition schedule building
Rent Control Court
Rent Control Petition Plaintiff Won
Case between Ashraf Ali vs Badhusha regarding rent control petition
COURT OF RENT CONTROL
Rent Control Petition Defendant Won