Abdul Salam vs Muhammed Uvaise — 100050/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 0096. Status: FOR HEARING. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
AS - CIVIL APPEAL
CNR: KLPT010003362017
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
100113/2017
Filing Date
06-03-2017
Registration No
100050/2024
Registration Date
06-03-2017
Court
District Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Pathanamthitta
Judge
1-DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, PATHANAMTHITTA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Abdul Salam
Haseena Hassan
Respondent(s)
Muhammed Uvaise
Hearing History
Judge: 1-DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, PATHANAMTHITTA
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 10-02-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 21-01-2026 | FOR HEARING |
| 06-12-2025 | FOR HEARING |
| 19-11-2025 | FOR HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 100050/2024 Abdul Salam and Haseena Hassan sought permission to file an appeal as indigent persons, claiming insufficient means to pay the required court fee of ₹1,49,000. The District Judge dismissed their petition, finding their claims unsubstantiated. The court determined that despite their assertions of financial hardship, the petitioners possessed sufficient means including property, vehicles, a bank balance of ₹11,712, and monthly income of ₹20,000, while attempting to suppress prior admission of conducting a wholesale fish business. The petition was dismissed, though petitioners were granted three weeks to pay the court fee. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 100050/2024 Abdul Salam and Haseena Hassan sought permission to file an appeal as indigent persons, claiming insufficient means to pay the required court fee of ₹1,49,000. The District Judge dismissed their petition, finding their claims unsubstantiated. The court determined that despite their assertions of financial hardship, the petitioners possessed sufficient means including property, vehicles, a bank balance of ₹11,712, and monthly income of ₹20,000, while attempting to suppress prior admission of conducting a wholesale fish business. The petition was dismissed, though petitioners were granted three weeks to pay the court fee. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts