Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.58/2023

Case between IDBI Bank vs Janani JLG Thycaud regarding balance court fee dispute.

Court
The Court of the Additional Munsiff-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-06-04
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

IDBI Bank, represented by its Assistant General Manager Geetha.R.T, brought the case against Janani JLG Thycaud and several individual defendants over a balance court fee issue. The court dismissed the application for more time to remit the fee.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found that the plaintiff failed to remit the balance court fee and rejected the application to extend the time for payment.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the plaintiff failed to remit the balance court fee and rejected the application to extend the time for payment.
Key Reasoning:
The court rejected the request for additional time based on the lack of an application and non-remittance of balance court fee.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The court noted that no application was filed seeking time to remit the balance court fee.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence rejected under order 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
IDBI Bank
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Janani JLG Thycaud
Relation
represented by its President
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Moly.S
Party Age
54
Relation
W/o Jayachandran.P
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sabitha.A.S
Party Age
31
Relation
D/o Sasidharan
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
V. Prasanna
Party Age
50
Relation
W/o R. Sivakumar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Anitha Kumari.V.V
Party Age
53
Plaintiffs Documents
Not mentioned
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Anithas Jacob
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Arun Chandran.A.K
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Pradeesh.M.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. N.Benser
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt. S.Lekha
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The court rejected the application seeking time to remit balance court fee.
Evidence:
No application seen filed seeks time to remit balance court fee. Hence rejected under order 7 Rule 11 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
Case between IDBI Bank vs Janani JLG Thycaud regarding balance court fee dispute.
Case Code Year
Case between IDBI Bank vs Janani JLG Thycaud regarding balance court fee dispute.

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

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Aradhi Restaurant regarding rejection of plaint
Court of Principal Munsiff
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Santhosh Kumar regarding realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jayan. E et al regarding realisation of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Smt. Sheeja. N regarding plaint rejection
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won