Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 1002/2017

Case between Devidas D Pisharady vs Harilal regarding money due from business transactions.

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2025-03-21
Duration
approximately-7 years 7 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Devidas D Pisharady, is claiming an outstanding amount from the defendant, Harilal, for diesel engines purchased between 2013 and 2015. The defendant contends that the suit is barred by limitation and denies any amount being due.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed with costs to the defendant.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff's claims were not substantiated due to lack of adequate evidence.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Devidas D Pisharady (30 years years) Eoor South P.O, Eroor, Thripunithura – 682 306

Defendants

Harilal (42 years years) Puthenpura, Thottupalam, Marutha road, Palakkad – 678 007

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought recovery of an amount due from the defendant.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Computer extract of Sales invoices submitted before the sale tax department
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to claim the outstanding amount due from the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: True copy of the payment made by the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was intended to show the payments made by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Office copy of the lawyer notice issued to the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to show the legal notice sent to the defendant regarding the outstanding amount.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used as evidence of the dispatch of the legal notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: True copy of the legal notice received by the defendant
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
This document was used by the defendant to show the discrepancy in the amounts claimed.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Oral evidence
Relevance:
Oral depositions were used to support the claims made by both parties.
Reference:

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Thu, 08/31/2017 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases