Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.918/2024

Case between Latha Venukumar vs The Chief Secretary et al regarding dismissal for default.

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt. Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-09-27
Duration
Case Code No.
918
Case Closed
Sat, 09/27/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Latha Venukumar is the plaintiff in this case against multiple defendants including government officials. The court dismissed the case due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit for default because the plaintiff was absent and no steps had been taken.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit for default because the plaintiff was absent and no steps had been taken.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff did not appear in court and did not take necessary steps to prosecute the case.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff did not appear in court and did not take necessary steps to prosecute the case.
Supporting Evidence
Steps not seen as taken so far even after repeated direction.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence dismissed for default.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Latha Venukumar
Party Age
55
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Chief Secretary
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The District Collector
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Special Thahasildar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Executive Engineer
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.B.Hareendran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Surabhi.V
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt.Namreta.S.H
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
The suit was dismissed for default due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.
Evidence:
Plaintiff absent. No representation. Steps not seen as taken so far even after repeated direction. Hence dismissed for default.

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
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2024

Quick Facts

Location
Thiruvananthapuram
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Sat, 09/27/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Government

Similar Cases

Case between Thara Kumari.S et al vs Premalatha.S.Nair et al regarding compromise agreement
IN THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Cindrella Darthalis vs The State of Kerala et al regarding Suit for realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between S.R. Amritha vs State of Kerala, The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Vilapil Grama Panchayath regarding suit dismissing for default.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Noorjahan vs Kerala State Electricity Board et al regarding default dismissal of suit.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between S.Sreejith.IPS vs K.M.Shajahan regarding damages
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won