Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 380/2023

Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Aneesh Kumar A regarding realisation of money

Court
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-09-15
Duration
approximately-4 years 1 day
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Indian Overseas Bank, claims the defendant, Aneesh Kumar A, has failed to repay a loan amounting to ₹6,80,737.13. The case proceeded ex parte after the defendant did not appear.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay ₹6,80,737.13 along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Costs of the suit were also awarded to the plaintiff.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff an amount of ₹6,80,737.13 with interest.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay ₹6,80,737.13 along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Costs of the suit were also awarded to the plaintiff.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The case of the plaintiff stands proved based on uncontested evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The case of the plaintiff stands proved based on uncontested evidence.
Supporting Evidence
From the uncontested evidence of the PW1, I am of the opinion that the case of the plaintiff stands proved.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: I. The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff, an amount of 6,80,737.13/- (Rupees six lakh eighty thousand seven hundred and thirty seven and thirteen paise only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Indian Overseas Bank
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Aneesh Kumar A
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Specimen of Credit Sanction Advice, Copy of Deed of Hypothecation, Copy of Demand Promissory Note, Copy of letter of undertaking, Copy of draft of the request, Copy of combined demand notice, Computer print out of statement of account, Copy of revival letter.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.P Sujeshkumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Keerthi K Narayanan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Shalu S
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Aswin B
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is directed to pay the plaintiff an amount of ₹6,80,737.13 with interest.
Evidence:
The defendant is directed to pay to the plaintiff, an amount of 6,80,737.13/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of institution of the suit, till its realisation from the defendant or from assets of defendant.
Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff shall be at liberty to realise the amount from the defendant or from the defendant's assets.
Evidence:
If the defendant do not pay the amount as ordered, the plaintiff shall be at the liberty to realise the same from the defendant or from assets of defendant.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
Considering the nature of the suit and circumstances surrounding the suit, the plaintiff is entitled to the costs of the suit from the defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Credit Sanction Advice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced as evidence to support the loan agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced as evidence to support the collateral for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Demand Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced as evidence of the defendant's promise to repay the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Letter of undertaking
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced as evidence of the terms agreed upon by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Request Draft
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced to further support the loan agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Combined Demand Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced to show the notice sent to the defendant regarding repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented to show the account details and outstanding amount.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Revival Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced as evidence related to the continuation of the loan agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Combined Demand Notice to Borrowers
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced to indicate the formal demand made to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Revival Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Presented as part of the documentation related to the loan agreement.
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
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Aneesh Kumar A regarding realisation of money
Case Code Year
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Aneesh Kumar A regarding realisation of money

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam, Kerala
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Government

Similar Cases

Case between Maker Village, Kerala Technology and Infrastructure Zone, Kinfra Hi Tech park, Kalamassery vs M/s Wahoo Technologies private limited et al regarding recovery of money.
I Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Punjab National Bank vs M/s Cafe Diaries et al regarding realization of money
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between State Bank of India, Ernakulam Branch represented by its Chief Manager, Jayesh P vs Thereesa et al regarding realization of money
THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Mohammed Mavadigothi regarding realization of money.
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between The Federal Bank Ltd vs Madonna Sebastian et al regarding realization of money
Court of Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won