Dekeya kallat vs Dinkel Balan — 100741/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,1,26. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 01st April 2026.

Case disposed

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLTR190022042024

e-Filing Number

12-08-2024

Filing Number

102239/2024

Filing Date

13-Aug-2024

Registration No

100741/2024

Registration Date

13-Aug-2024

Court

Munsiffcourt, Kodungallur

Judge

1-Munsiff Kodungallur

Decision Date

01-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--REJECTED

Last updated 15-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,1,26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Dekeya kallat

    Adv. BENNY P P

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Dinkel Balan

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    JudgementView PDF

    In O.S.741/2024, the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur rejected plaintiff Dekeya Kallat's suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against defendant Dinkel Balan. The suit was rejected on procedural grounds because the plaintiff failed to pay the required B.C.F (Court Fee), was absent during the hearing, and remained unrepresented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Bcf and steps

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  5. 20-Jan-2026

    Bcf and steps

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  6. 05-Nov-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  7. 28-Jul-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  8. 11-Apr-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  9. 10-Mar-2025

    Written Statement

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  10. 30-Nov-2024

    Call on

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  11. 15-Oct-2024

    Return of notice

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  12. 24-Aug-2024

    Return of notice

    Munsiff Kodungallur

  13. 13-Aug-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 13-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 100741/2024

casestatus.in Summary

In O.S.741/2024, the Munsiff Court, Kodungallur rejected plaintiff Dekeya Kallat's suit for permanent prohibitory injunction against defendant Dinkel Balan. The suit was rejected on procedural grounds because the plaintiff failed to pay the required B.C.F (Court Fee), was absent during the hearing, and remained unrepresented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case