Case Summary
The case involves a rent control petition filed by Prasannan against Sabu. The petitioner ultimately chose not to pursue the petition, leading to its dismissal.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Final Judgment
No
The petition was dismissed as not pressed by the petitioner.
Key Reasoning:
The petitioner chose not to pursue the petition, leading to its dismissal.
The petitioner chose not to pursue the petition, leading to its dismissal.
Why Defendant Won:
The petitioner chose not to pursue the petition, leading to its dismissal.
The petitioner chose not to pursue the petition, leading to its dismissal.
Supporting Evidence
The petitioner represented. Learned counsel of the petitioner filed not pressed memo.
Judgment Evidence:
Hence the petition is dismissed as not pressed. No order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Prasannan
- Party Age
- 62
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sabu
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P. Vijayachandran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Lissy Gopal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. Ninega Dinesh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Dismissed
Description:
The petition was dismissed as not pressed.
Evidence:
Hence the petition is dismissed as not pressed.
Documents & Evidence
Case Classification
Case Type
Rent Control Petition
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Prasannan vs Sabu regarding rent control petition
Case Code Year
Case between Prasannan vs Sabu regarding rent control petition