Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. 33/2022

Case between Akhil Thomas vs Santal Paul et al regarding realization of money

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Judge
Smt. Smitha Susan Mathew
Order Date
2025-10-31
Duration
approximately-3 years 2 months
Case Code No.
33
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Akhil Thomas filed a suit against Santal Paul and Mini Vijayan for the realization of money related to an agreement for property transfer that was not executed. The plaintiff claims to have paid ₹3 Lakhs as advance, but the defendants failed to fulfill their obligations under the agreement.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the plaintiff and ordered the defendants to pay ₹3 Lakhs along with interest and costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
₹3,00,000/- with 12% interest per annum till realization
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff and ordered the defendants to pay ₹3 Lakhs along with interest and costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved the existence of agreements and the defendants' liability to return the advance payment.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved the existence of agreements and the defendants' liability to return the advance payment.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff proved that the existence of agreements and the defendants' refusal to execute those agreements led to his claim for realization of money.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) as on the date of suit, thereafter interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the amount of ₹3,00,000/- till the date of decree and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum for the amount of ₹3,00,000/- from the date of decree till realization of the amount from the defendants 1 and 2 and their assets.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Akhil Thomas
Party Age
27
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Santal Paul
Party Age
47
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mini vijayan
Party Age
35
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Agreement dated 31.08.2021, Photocopy of Agreement dated 31.08.2021, Photocopy of Agreement dated 15.12.2020, Office copy of Lawyer's notice dated 06.01.2022.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Saju Thomas
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
A.K. Kuriakose
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover ₹3,00,000 along with interest from the defendants.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only) as on the date of suit, thereafter interest at the rate of 12% per annum for the amount of ₹3,00,000/- till the date of decree.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to recover the costs of the suit from the defendants 1 and 2 and their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document evidences the agreement between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant for the sale of property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Photocopy of Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is a photocopy of the agreement dated 31.08.2021 between plaintiff and 2nd defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Photocopy of Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This is a photocopy of the agreement dated 15.12.2020 between the 1st and 2nd defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
A notice sent by the plaintiff to both defendants demanding the return of the advance payment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt corresponding to the lawyer's notice sent to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: A D Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment card showing that the 2nd defendant received the lawyer's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A6(a)

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2022

Quick Facts

Location
Kanjirappally, Kerala
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Case Filed
Wed, 08/31/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Elsamma Kuriakose vs The Chief Manager (Authorised Officer) regarding dismissal of suit.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Johnson Joseph vs Raveendran @ Kunjumon et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Unnikrishnan K vs Mohanan regarding permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Hellen Joseph vs Joji Thomas regarding realisation of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sheela Raju et al vs P.K. Madhu et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won