Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No. 433/ 2019

Case between Sainulabdeen vs Sajeer regarding balance court fee

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Judge
Sri. ARAVIND P.
Order Date
2025-03-06
Duration
Case Closed
Thu, 03/06/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves the plaintiff Sainulabdeen and defendant Sajeer regarding the remittance of balance court fees. The court found that the plaintiff failed to remit the fee despite multiple opportunities.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court rejected the suit due to the plaintiff's failure to remit the balance court fee after being given multiple opportunities. Both parties were represented but the plaintiff was absent at the hearing.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court rejected the suit due to the plaintiff's failure to remit the balance court fee after being given multiple opportunities. Both parties were represented but the plaintiff was absent at the hearing.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to comply with the requirement to remit the balance court fee.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to comply with the requirement to remit the balance court fee.
Supporting Evidence
It is noted that repeated opportunities produced to the plaintiff to remit balance court fee. Even then the plaintiff is not remitted the balance court fee.

Judgment Evidence:

Hence the suit is rejected.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sainulabdeen
Party Age
75
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sajeer
Party Age
44
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
Sri. V. Vinod
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaintiff's suit was rejected due to non-payment of the balance court fee.
Evidence:
Hence the suit is rejected.

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Sainulabdeen vs Sajeer regarding balance court fee
Case Code Year
Case between Sainulabdeen vs Sajeer regarding balance court fee

Quick Facts

Location
Varkala, Thiruvananthapuram District
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiffs Court, Varkala
Case Filed
Tue, 01/01/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Thu, 03/06/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 04/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
75%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Shibu vs Ajeesh et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Vijayakumari vs Induslnd Bank regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Devakumar vs Asokan et al regarding impleading an additional defendant.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VARKALA
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between State Bank of Travancore et al vs M/s Talipot Technology Solutions Ltd. et al regarding court fee remittance
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jayan. E et al regarding realisation of money
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won