Suma Shajimon vs Muraleedharan (Murali) Advocate - CHANDRAMOHAN V, CHANDRAMOHAN V, CHANDRAMOHAN VCHANDRAMOHAN V, — 100022/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order43, Rule 1. Status: Return of Notice. Next hearing: 09th July 2026.

Return of Notice Next hearing 09-Jul-2026 this date has passed

CMA - CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL

CNR: KLKT010013092025

e-Filing Number

10-04-2025

Filing Number

100314/2025

Filing Date

11-Apr-2025

Registration No

100022/2025

Registration Date

11-Apr-2025

Court

Principal District & Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kottayam

Judge

2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge - I, Kottayam

Last updated 23-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Order43, Rule 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Suma Shajimon

    Adv. JAISON PALIYIL

  2. 2.Muraleedharan Nair

    Adv. JAISON PALIYIL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Muraleedharan (Murali) Advocate - CHANDRAMOHAN V, CHANDRAMOHAN V, CHANDRAMOHAN VCHANDRAMOHAN V,

  2. 2.Bindhu Murali

    Adv. CHANDRAMOHAN V,CHANDRAMOHAN V CHANDRAMOHAN V

  3. 3.Navaneeth

    Adv. CHANDRAMOHAN V,CHANDRAMOHAN V CHANDRAMOHAN V

Case History

  1. 09-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 30-May-2026

    Return of Notice

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  3. 23-May-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: 100022/2025 The Principal District Judge of Kottayam allowed a delay condonation petition filed by Suma Shajimon and Muraleedharan Nair under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioners sought to condone a 61-day delay in filing a civil appeal against a Munsiff's Court order dated 09.01.2025. The court found sufficient grounds for condonation, noting the petitioners learned of the order belatedly, changed counsel due to dissatisfaction, and the second petitioner's illness contributed to the delay, with no gross negligence evident. The petition was allowed subject to the condition that the petitioners pay ₹1,500 in costs to the respondents by 29.05.2026, failing which the petition would stand dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 23-May-2026

    Payment of Cost

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  5. 21-May-2026

    Orders In IA

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  6. 01-Apr-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  7. 19-Mar-2026

    For Hearing

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  8. 28-Feb-2026

    Report on Mediation

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  9. 09-Feb-2026

    Report on Mediation

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  10. 05-Feb-2026

    Appearance of Parties

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  11. 12-Jan-2026

    For Objection

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  12. 01-Dec-2025

    Await Lcr

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  13. 03-Nov-2025

    Await Records

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  14. 30-Sep-2025

    Adjourned

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  15. 25-Sep-2025

    Call On

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  16. 09-Sep-2025

    For Objection

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  17. 08-Aug-2025

    For Objection

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  18. 21-Jul-2025

    For Objection

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  19. 24-Jun-2025

    For Objection

    Principal District and Sessions Judge, Kottayam

  20. 11-Apr-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  21. 11-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 100022/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 100022/2025 The Principal District Judge of Kottayam allowed a delay condonation petition filed by Suma Shajimon and Muraleedharan Nair under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The petitioners sought to condone a 61-day delay in filing a civil appeal against a Munsiff's Court order dated 09.01.2025. The court found sufficient grounds for condonation, noting the petitioners learned of the order belatedly, changed counsel due to dissatisfaction, and the second petitioner's illness contributed to the delay, with no gross negligence evident. The petition was allowed subject to the condition that the petitioners pay ₹1,500 in costs to the respondents by 29.05.2026, failing which the petition would stand dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case