Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No. 378/2018

Case between K.O. Sarjahan vs Kunnathunad Gramapanchayath et al regarding compensation for civil works

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Alshari A.
Order Date
2025-02-25
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

K.O. Sarjahan filed a suit seeking compensation from Kunnathunad Gramapanchayath and its Assistant Engineer for delays in payment related to civil works on a canal road. The plaintiff alleges financial losses due to the defendants' irresponsible actions.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit, ruling that K.O. Sarjahan lacked the authority to file the suit in his personal capacity as the work was done on behalf of the beneficiary committee. The plaintiff's claims for compensation were deemed baseless.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit, ruling that K.O. Sarjahan lacked the authority to file the suit in his personal capacity as the work was done on behalf of the beneficiary committee. The plaintiff's claims for compensation were deemed baseless.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff filed the suit in his personal capacity without authority, as the work was performed on behalf of the beneficiary committee.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff filed the suit in his personal capacity without authority, as the work was performed on behalf of the beneficiary committee.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff had filed the suit in his personal capacity and did not establish any entitlement to sue alone without the beneficiary committee.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit stands dismissed. No costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
K.O. Sarjahan
Party Age
36
Relation
S/o.
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kunnathunad Gramapanchayath
Relation
represented by its Secretary
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Assistant Engineer, L.S.G.D Section
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of the agreement bearing No. 58/15-16, Copy of the Order of Hon’ble High Court in WP(C) No.3450/2017, Office copy of the Lawyer notice, Postal receipts (3 Nos), Postal acknowledgment Cards.
Defendants Documents
The agreement bearing No. 52/15-16, Copy of decision of Kunnathunad Grama Panchayath, Copy of the cheque bearing No. 2653604 for an amount of Rs. 4,30,020/-, Copy of the Order of Hon’ble High Court in WP(C).No. 3450/2017.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.M. Alias
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
C.T. Soman
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Bobby K. Paul
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
E.G Ambily
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Compensation claimed for various losses including mental agony and litigation expenses.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is not entitled to get any relief from these defendants.
Relief Type: Interest
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Claim for interest at the rate of 12% on the amount received from 1.04.2016 onwards.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is not entitled to any amount towards interest.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Claim for costs incurred during the litigation process.
Evidence:
This court cannot assume and infer the expenses incurred by the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the agreement bearing No. 58/15-16.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Court Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the Order of Hon’ble High Court in WP(C) No.3450/2017.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Office copy of the Lawyer notice issued against the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Postal Receipts
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipts (3 Nos) related to the notice.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Cards
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal acknowledgment Cards.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The agreement bearing No. 52/15-16 produced along with file.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Decision Copy
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of decision of Kunnathunad Grama Panchayath.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Cheque
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of the cheque bearing No. 2653604 for an amount of Rs. 4,30,020/.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Court Order
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Copy of the Order of Hon’ble High Court in WP(C). No. 3450/2017.
Reference:
Ext.B4

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between K.O. Sarjahan vs Kunnathunad Gramapanchayath et al regarding compensation for civil works
Case Code Year
Case between K.O. Sarjahan vs Kunnathunad Gramapanchayath et al regarding compensation for civil works

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour

Quick Facts

Location
Perumbavoor, Kerala
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between M. G Sukumaran vs Aboobacker regarding return of money
THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between M. G. Sukumaran vs Aboobacker regarding petition for lifting attachment
THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Binojkumar Nair vs Jitha Gopi et al regarding Suit rejection under order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C.
The Munsiff Court of Perumbavoor
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Union Bank of India, Perumbavoor Branch vs Shihab K A regarding Suit not pressed
THE MUNSIFF COURT OF PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Prakash V vs Chummar et al regarding Suit Rejection under Order 7 Rule 11
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Defendant Won