Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.2163/2023

Case between Rahuma Beevi.A vs Reghunath.G regarding rejection of plaint

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-07-15
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Rahuma Beevi.A, is involved in a legal suit against the defendant, Reghunath.G, regarding the rejection of the plaint. The court found the plaintiff absent and without representation at the time of the hearing.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and the lack of representation. No application for enlargement of time was filed.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and the lack of representation. No application for enlargement of time was filed.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of the Civil Procedure due to the plaintiff's absence.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The plaint was rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of the Civil Procedure due to the plaintiff's absence.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence plaint rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of the Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Rahuma Beevi.A
Party Age
50
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Reghunath.G
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Shihabudeen Kariyath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Babin.S.Xavier
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.K.P.Jayaraj
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt.Shylaja.K.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Ajun Krishna.U.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint was rejected due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of court fee.
Evidence:
Hence plaint rejected under order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of the 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 Rahuma Beevi.A vs Reghunath.G regarding rejection of plaint
Case Code Year
Case between Rahuma Beevi.A vs Reghunath.G regarding rejection of plaint

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

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
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won