Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1230/2020

Case between Sahila.S.Nair et al vs M/S Nirmal Krishna Nidhi Ltd. et al regarding plaint rejection

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri.Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-07-25
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This case involves plaintiffs Sahila S. Nair and Adhira S. S against defendants M/S Nirmal Krishna Nidhi Ltd., K. Nirmalan, and The Receiver regarding the rejection of the plaint due to absence of the plaintiff and lack of representation. The court found no application filed and no balance court fee remitted.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court rejected the plaint due to the absence of the plaintiff and lack of representation. The rejection was based on procedural grounds.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the plaint due to the absence of the plaintiff and lack of representation. The rejection was based on procedural grounds.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected due to the absence of the plaintiff and non-remittance of court fees.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected due to the absence of the plaintiff and non-remittance of court fees.
Supporting Evidence
The absence of the plaintiff and the lack of representation led to the rejection of the plaint.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sahila.S.Nair
Party Age
50
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Adhira.S.S
Party Age
24
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/S Nirmal Krishna Nidhi Ltd.
Relation
represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
K. Nirmalan
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Receiver
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. R. Sundaresan Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Kattukad N Jayakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. K.K. Vijayan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint was rejected.
Evidence:
Hence, the plaint is rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the Code of 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 Sahila.S.Nair et al vs M/S Nirmal Krishna Nidhi Ltd. et al regarding plaint rejection
Case Code Year
Case between Sahila.S.Nair et al vs M/S Nirmal Krishna Nidhi Ltd. et al regarding plaint rejection

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