Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1235/2020

Case between Peter Thomas Fernandez vs South Indian Bank Limited et al regarding counter claim

Court
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri.Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-07-25
Duration
Case Code No.
1235
Case Closed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Peter Thomas Fernandez is the plaintiff against South Indian Bank Limited and others regarding a counter claim. The court found the plaintiff absent and rejected the suit and counter claim due to non-remittance of balance court fees.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court rejected both the plaintiff's suit and the defendant's counter claim due to non-remittance of balance court fees. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected both the plaintiff's suit and the defendant's counter claim due to non-remittance of balance court fees. The plaintiff was absent during the hearing.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to appear and did not remit the required balance court fees.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Not available

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure. No balance court fee remitted in the counter claim also. Hence, the counter claim is also rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Peter Thomas Fernandez
Party Age
62
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
South Indian Bank Limited
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Deputy General Manager
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Branch Manager
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Victor D’ Silva
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Rajesh.R
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. A.S. Anilkumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint and counter claim were rejected due to non-payment of court fees.
Evidence:
Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure. No balance court fee remitted in the counter claim also. Hence, the counter claim is also rejected under Order VII Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Judgment
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The court delivered the judgment regarding the rejection of the plaint and counter claim.
Reference:

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
2020

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Fri, 07/25/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

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