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

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 155/2020

Case between Madhu John vs Balabhadran regarding suit for money

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2024-11-30
Duration
approximately-7 years 7 months

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Madhu John as the Plaintiff and Balabhadran as the Defendant regarding a suit for money. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant failed to return an advance payment made for a property sale agreement, while the Defendant denies the allegations and claims the documents are fabricated.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the Plaintiff and decreed the suit. The Defendant was ordered to pay the Plaintiff Rs. 5,20,000/- along with interest and costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant shall pay Rs. 5,20,000/- along with interest @9% per annum and costs of the suit.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found sufficient evidence of the execution of the promissory note and agreement for sale.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follow. 1) The defendant shall pay Rs. 5,20,000/- to the defendant along with interest @9% per annum from 10/02/2017 the date of 19/12/2019, the date of issuance of demand notice by the plaintiff and in default of paying the same the plaintiff shall be entitled to recover the amount with post-decretal interest @ 6% per annum.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

Madhu John (43 years) Painuthara house, Kadavanthra village, Kanayannur taluk, Ernakulam, Kochi

Defendants

Balabhadran (48 years) Mukkath house from Nandanam, Perumbalam Muri, Perumbalam village, Cherthala taluk, Alappuzha

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover ₹5,20,000/- along with interest.
Evidence:
The defendant shall pay ₹5,20,000/- to the defendant along with interest @9% per annum from 10/02/2017.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to costs of the suit.
Evidence:
Plaintiff shall also be entitled for costs of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Photocopy of Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was submitted to prove ownership of the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Photocopy of Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was provided as evidence of the title of the property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Agreement executed in favour of the plaintiff
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This agreement forms the basis of the plaintiff's claim for the return of the advance payment.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This note acknowledges the defendant's liability to return the advance amount.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Lawyer notice issued to the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice demonstrates the plaintiff's formal demand for the repayment of the advance amount.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Oral Evidence
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
Testimonies by witnesses were provided during the hearings.
Reference:

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Sun, 04/21/2013 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases