Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS 146/2017

Case between Moideen.V.P vs Pathumma et al regarding setting aside a final decree

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Judge
Sri.Vivek P
Order Date
2025-01-31
Duration
approximately-7 years 8 months 3 days
Case Code No.
146
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The petitioner Moideen.V.P seeks to set aside a final decree in a partition suit due to alleged non-receipt of summons. The respondents argue that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings and failed to appear knowingly.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The applications for setting aside the final decree are dismissed as the petitioner failed to justify the absence and the delay in filing the application.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The applications for setting aside the final decree are dismissed as the petitioner failed to justify the absence and the delay in filing the application.
Key Reasoning:
Petitioner did not sufficiently prove his claim of not receiving summons.
Why Defendant Won:
Petitioner did not sufficiently prove his claim of not receiving summons.
Supporting Evidence
The reason stated in the petition for non-appearance of the petitioner before the court is unsatisfactory and unproved.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, both applications are dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Moideen.V.P
Party Age
58
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Pathumma
Party Age
70
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rasiya
Party Age
58
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Subaida
Party Age
55
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Suhara
Party Age
53
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jufriya
Party Age
51
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri..K.M.Muhammed Iqubal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Muhammed Ariff
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Application for setting aside the final decree passed on 31.10.2018
Evidence:
Hence I find that the petitioner had not made out sufficient grounds to set aside the final decree passed and he has not satisfactorily explained the delay in preferring this application.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Application for condoning the delay of 1146 days in preferring this application
Evidence:
In the result, both applications are dismissed.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS
Case Code Year
2017

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Mon, 05/29/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Madhavan MP et al vs Sreejith MP regarding IA allowed.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Ratheesh T vs Vibul M regarding IA 166/2024
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between PT Chandran vs P R Ashok regarding setting aside an exparte decree
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE.
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between C.M.Sreemathy et al vs Raman @Ramachandran et al regarding restoration of suit.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Parol Imbichikoya vs Pulparambil Asees regarding restoration of a case
Principal Munsiff Court -I
Civil Suit Unknown