Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.2043/2023

Case between The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd vs Indo Tibetan Art Palace et al regarding court fee and representation

Court
THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-02-20
Duration
Case Closed
Thu, 02/20/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd, represented by Khurshid Ahmad Bhat, sued the defendants, including Indo Tibetan Art Palace and others, regarding a court fee issue. The suit was heard but the plaintiff was absent with no representation.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit due to the absence of the plaintiff and not having paid the necessary court fees.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit due to the absence of the plaintiff and not having paid the necessary court fees.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff was absent, and there was no representation regarding the case.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff was absent and had no representation.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence Plaint rejected U/o 7 Rule 11 Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Indo Tibetan Art Palace
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Manzoor Ahmed Bhat
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mushtaq Ahmed Shamrock
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Power of Attorney Holder details of Khurshid Ahmad Bhat
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Mumtaz Shumsuddin
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Anisha Aslam
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The suit was rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Evidence:
No Balance court Fee remitted. Hence Plaint rejected U/o 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 The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd vs Indo Tibetan Art Palace et al regarding court fee and representation
Case Code Year
Case between The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd vs Indo Tibetan Art Palace et al regarding court fee and representation

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Thu, 02/20/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

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