Muhammed Rafeeque Kaarorath vs P Shareef Advocate - P. Divakaran, Sylaja — 200067/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26, order 7, rule. Status: Payment of balance court fee.. Next hearing: 31st March 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLKK290003612023

Payment of balance court fee.

Next Hearing

31st March 2026

e-Filing Number

10-08-2023

Filing Number

168/2023

Filing Date

11-08-2023

Registration No

200067/2023

Registration Date

11-08-2023

Court

Sub Court, Vatakara

Judge

1-Sub Judge/Asst.sessions Judge

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26, order 7, rule

Petitioner(s)

Muhammed Rafeeque Kaarorath

Adv. MUHAMMED SADIQUE UK

Respondent(s)

P Shareef Advocate - P. Divakaran, Sylaja

Kunhabdulla Haji

Adv. M.K. Balakrishnan

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Sub Judge/Asst.sessions Judge

07-03-2026

Payment of balance court fee.

27-02-2026

Call on

10-02-2026

Call on

29-01-2026

Call on

11-12-2025

Call on

Interim Orders

24-06-2025
Order

Summary: The application filed by plaintiff Muhammad Rafeeq Karorath under Order 13 Rule 9 CPC to return the original Sale Deed No. 1701 of 2023 (subject matter of the case) and replace it with a certified copy has been dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's claim that the original deed was needed urgently for the Village Office, noting that the deed is a crucial material object in ongoing criminal case Crime No. 608 of 2023 (involving allegations of forgery under IPC Sections 463, 465, 468, 471, 420, and 34), and granting the request would be inappropriate given the pending criminal investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The application filed by plaintiff Muhammad Rafeeq Karorath under Order 13 Rule 9 CPC to return the original Sale Deed No. 1701 of 2023 (subject matter of the case) and replace it with a certified copy has been dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's claim that the original deed was needed urgently for the Village Office, noting that the deed is a crucial material object in ongoing criminal case Crime No. 608 of 2023 (involving allegations of forgery under IPC Sections 463, 465, 468, 471, 420, and 34), and granting the request would be inappropriate given the pending criminal investigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Sub Court, Vatakara All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case