Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.300/2020

Case between Rajitha vs Leela et al regarding want of prosecution

Court
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-01-20
Duration
Case Code No.
300
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Rajitha as the plaintiff and Leela along with several others as defendants. The plaintiff was absent from the proceedings, and the court determined that the plaintiff was not interested in prosecuting the suit, leading to its dismissal.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff was absent and did not provide representation. The court concluded that the plaintiff was not interested in pursuing the case.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff was absent and did not provide representation. The court concluded that the plaintiff was not interested in pursuing the case.
Key Reasoning:
The court deemed the plaintiff indifferent to the prosecution of the lawsuit.
Why Defendant Won:
The court deemed the plaintiff indifferent to the prosecution of the lawsuit.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff was absent, no representation.

Judgment Evidence:

This court is of the view that the plaintiff is not interested in prosecuting the suit and hence, the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Rajitha
Party Age
40
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Leela
Party Age
60
Relation
W/o.
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Rengini
Party Age
42
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ranjeev.S
Party Age
44
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Nainar C
Party Age
70
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Usha Selvan
Party Age
55
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. R. Kunjukrishnan Potti
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. T. Harikumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.S. Vijayakumaran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Rona Eliza Rajan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.Renju. C.P
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Dismissed
Description:
The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Evidence:
This court is of the view that the plaintiff is not interested in prosecuting the suit and hence, the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.

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
2020

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

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