Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Dr. V. Ajikumar and Dr. Veena Ajikumar, claim that they paid the defendant, Sri. Manu Abraham, ₹4,00,000 for the development of a dental equipment prototype, which was never completed. The defendant denies liability, asserting the payment was for consultation services.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
₹6,31,386 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering the defendant to pay ₹6,31,386 with interest due to the failure to deliver a prototype as agreed.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence proving their claim, while the defendant failed to counter the claims.
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence proving their claim, while the defendant failed to counter the claims.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence proving their claim, while the defendant failed to counter the claims.
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence proving their claim, while the defendant failed to counter the claims.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiffs had invented and prepared technical specification and design of a new equipment to be manufactured as alleged. The issues are to be answered in favour of the plaintiff and are answered so.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiffs, an amount of ₹6,31,386/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum (simple interest) from the date of institution of the suit, till its realisation from the defendant or from assets of defendant.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Dr. V. Ajikumar
- Party Age
- 65
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Dr. Veena Ajikumar
- Party Age
- 57
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sri. Manu Abraham
- Party Age
- 47
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Computer print out of email communications, Legal Notice, Statement of Account
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- G. Rajagopal
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- R. Surendran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Leela Lakshmi S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Luke J. Chirayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to recover an amount of ₹6,31,386/- from the defendant.
Evidence:
In the facts of the case, as defendant has characterised this suit as one of commercial nature... I am of the opinion that interest at the rate of 18% as sought for can be imposed as pre suit interest and is imposed so.
Relief Type:
Interest
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till realization.
Evidence:
I am of the opinion that fixing the rate of interest at 6% per annum (simple interest) will suffice interest of justice, as post suit interest.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
Considering the nature of the suit and circumstances surrounding the suit, the plaintiffs are entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Email Communication
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of email communication confirming the email addresses of the parties.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Email Communication
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of email communication regarding specifications.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Hardware Specification
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of Dental Implant Unit Hardware Specification.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Email Communication
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of email communication.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Email Communication
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of email communication.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Email Communication
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of email communication.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Computer print out of statement of account for the specified period (subject to proof).
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of legal notice sent to the defendant demanding repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt for the legal notice sent.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal acknowledgment card related to the legal notice.
Reference:
Ext.A10
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 Dr. V. Ajikumar et al vs Sri. Manu Abraham regarding refund of payment for prototype development
Case Code Year
Case between Dr. V. Ajikumar et al vs Sri. Manu Abraham regarding refund of payment for prototype development
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt