OS. No.1525/2023

Case between Chandrankutty vs Raghavan Pillai et al regarding plaint rejection

Court

COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF

Judge

Sri.Mithun Gopi.G.S

Order Date

2025-06-04

Duration

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Chandrankutty is the plaintiff in this case against Raghavan Pillai and others regarding the rejection of a plaint. The court found that no balance court fee was remitted and no application was filed.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

The court found the plaint was rejected due to the absence of the balance court fee and a lack of filed application.

Key Reasoning:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Why Defendant Won:
Reason not clearly mentioned

Supporting Evidence

Judgment Evidence:

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

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Chandrankutty
Party Age: 60
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Raghavan Pillai (Late)
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Balachandran Nair.R
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Radhakrishnan Nair (Late)
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: L. Sindhu
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Arun Prakash
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Smt. Sonay John
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Smt. Serafina Illyas
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. S.A. Sundar
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Rejected

Description:

The plaint was rejected due to no balance court fee remitted and no application filed.

Evidence:

No balance court fee seen remitted. No application is seen filed. Hence, the plaint is rejected under order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification