Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.703/2022

Case between V.Yasodha vs Hyme Chandran @ Hymath et al regarding plaint rejection.

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-07-11
Duration
Case Closed
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

V.Yasodha is the plaintiff, and the defendants include Hyme Chandran @ Hymath and the Thiruvananthapuram North Co-operative Society Limited. The case involves the rejection of the plaint due to the plaintiff's absence and the failure to remit the balance court fee.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The plaint was rejected because the plaintiff was absent and did not remit the balance court fee.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The plaint was rejected because the plaintiff was absent and did not remit the balance court fee.
Key Reasoning:
The plaint was rejected due to non-compliance with court procedures.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaint was rejected due to non-compliance with court procedures.
Supporting Evidence
The court noted that the plaintiff was absent and did not file any application seeking enlargement of time.

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
V.Yasodha
Party Age
61
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Hyme Chandran @ Hymath
Party Age
35
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Thiruvananthapuram North Co-operative Society Limited No.T.1531
Relation
represented by its Secretary
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Emmanuel.C.M.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Pramod Kumar.G.S.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.Pradeep.N.R.
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. K.Ramachandran Nair
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
The plaint was rejected due to the plaintiff's absence and lack of representation.
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 V.Yasodha vs Hyme Chandran @ Hymath et al regarding plaint rejection.
Case Code Year
Case between V.Yasodha vs Hyme Chandran @ Hymath et al regarding plaint rejection.

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Case Closed
Fri, 07/11/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

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