Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 739/2021

Case between Anooja P. A vs Jerry James et al regarding recovery of money

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2024-12-02
Duration
approximately-4 years 3 months
Case Closed
Mon, 12/02/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Anooja P. A filed a suit against Jerry James and Abhiya Jerry for the recovery of ₹5,00,000. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants induced her to invest in their share market business, promising high returns which they failed to provide.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of any agreement regarding the investment. The court found the plaintiff's conduct implausible given her education and the lack of documentation.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit as the plaintiff failed to prove the existence of any agreement regarding the investment. The court found the plaintiff's conduct implausible given her education and the lack of documentation.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish any contractual agreement or the basis for the transfer of money.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
It should have been properly established before the court that the defendants had obtained money from the plaintiff on promise of investment in share market in return of giving profit or return of the invested amount.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Anooja P. A
Party Age
33
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jerry James
Party Age
30
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Abhiya Jerry
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Computer print out of statement of account for the period from 13.08.2020 to 30.09.2020, Certified copy of FIR No. 0261/2021.
Defendants Documents
Copy of the Power of Attorney.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
M.H Hanis (Manakal)
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Jini mol P.M
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Lekshmi Shankar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Nancy Mol P
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Anandhu P.C
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Krishna T.B
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
C. Sivadas
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought to recover an amount of ₹5,00,000/- with interest.
Evidence:
Hence, I am of the opinion that the relief sought for in the plaint cannot be granted in favour of the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of the statement of account for the period from 13.08.2020 to 30.09.2020, marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of statement of account from 01.01.2021 to 30.09.2024, marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: FIR
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of FIR No. 0261/2021 relevant to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of statement of account for the period from 13.08.2020 to 30.09.2020.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certificate under the bankers books evidence Act.
Reference:
Ext.A4(a)
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of statement of account for the period from 14.08.2020 to 25.02.2021.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Certification
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certification u/s. 65 B of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and u/s. 2 A of Bankers Books Evidence Act.
Reference:
Ext.A5(a)
Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of the Power of Attorney, marked subject to proof.
Reference:
Ext.B1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between Anooja P. A vs Jerry James et al regarding recovery of money
Case Code Year
Case between Anooja P. A vs Jerry James et al regarding recovery of money

Quick Facts

Location
ERNAKULAM
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Fri, 08/14/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 12/02/2024 - 12:00
From
Sun, 12/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Tue, 12/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Canara Bank vs Mrs. Preethymol P.T regarding realization of money
Court of the Third Addl. Munsiff & Rent Controller, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Fr. Antony Chiriyankandath vs Sri. Mathew C.T. regarding realization of money
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Bank of Baroda represented by its Chief Manager, Manohar M vs Ratheesh P.S regarding recovery of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Meera N B vs Vincy E J et al regarding realization of money
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s Transformers and Electrical Industries vs M/s Crystal Traders regarding realization of money
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won