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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S. No 1274 /2019

Case between Krishna Kumar V vs Biju Mathew regarding realization of money

Court
II ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Needi.K.Dinamany
Order Date
2024-08-19
Duration
approximately-6 years 20 days

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Krishna Kumar V, the plaintiff, was a tenant of Biju Mathew, the defendant. The case revolves around the demand for the return of a security deposit after the plaintiff vacated the rented premises.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendant to pay Rs.1,90,000/- with interest. Additionally, the plaintiff is entitled to recover costs of the proceeding.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant shall pay Rs.1,90,000/- with interest and costs of the suit.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully demonstrated that the defendant owed a security deposit, which the defendant failed to return.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1) Defendant shall pay Rs.1,90,000/- (Rupees One lakh ninety thousand only) with interest 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and 6% from the date of decree till payment or realization, as the case may be, to the plaintiff.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Krishna Kumar V (52 years) Manasi, Haritha Nagar, House No.66, Calicut, Pin-670317

Defendants

Biju Mathew (50 years) Mattamana House, Opp. Govt. High School, Kaloor, Cochin, Pin-682017

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Claim for recovery of Rs.1,90,000/- from the defendant.
Evidence:
On an overall appreciation of the facts and evidence of the case, this court is satisfied that plaintiff has succeeded in establishing the case and is entitled for a decree for realization of Rs.1,90,000/-.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Claim for costs of the proceedings.
Evidence:
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as plaintiff is entitled for a decree, he is also entitled for the costs of the proceedings from defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Email
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Email sent to the defendant regarding tax payment receipt.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Email
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Email sent to the defendant informing about the need to stop the showroom due to lack of business.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Email
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Email sent to the defendant informing about vacating the premises.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certificate under section 65B of the Evidence Act pertaining to the emails.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Lawyer notice issued to the defendant demanding the return of security deposit.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Reply to the lawyer notice from the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued by the defendant for receiving Rs.35,000/-.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued by the defendant for receiving Rs.35,000/-.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued by the defendant for receiving Rs.33,500/-.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued by the defendant for receiving Rs.35,000/-.
Reference:
Ext.A10

Quick Facts

Location
Case Filed
Tue, 01/01/2019 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases