Private Individual

The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking partition of the jointly owned property with defendants and separate allotment of their share.

The petitioners, represented by Kandath, sought eviction of the respondent from a room due to rent arrears and to start a supermarket for livelihood.

The case involves a petition by the defendant, Ahammedukutty, to set aside an exparte decree passed against him. The plaintiff, Kathiya Umma, opposed the petition, arguing that the defendant had no legitimate reason for his absence during the trial.

Plaintiff Sakkeena filed a suit seeking injunction against defendant Saidalavi, but the suit was dismissed due to the absence of the plaintiff in court.

Saidalikutty filed a case against Chittakath Variyathazhath Abdul Karim. The case was dismissed for default as no steps were taken despite repeated chances.

Thattakrakandiyil Prabhakaran, the Decree Holder, sought property delivery against Girija, Nishad, and Balan. The order confirmed the delivery of the property and closed the Execution Petition.

The petitioners sought eviction compensation and reached a compromise with the respondent to pay Rs. 2,00,000 in total, with Rs. 1,50,000 already paid.

Petitioners filed an application to set aside ex-parte decree regarding an injunction case, citing health reasons for their absence during trial.

Petitioner Kalyanigunashekaran aged 62 filed petition against respondent M.Rajan aged 58 seeking restoration of final decree application.

Plaintiff Suhara filed a suit for injunction against defendants Fathima and K.P.Kareem. However, the suit was dismissed as the plaintiff was absent and had no legal representation.