Case Summary
The case involves Margaret Paious as the plaintiff and Vinod Kumar as the defendant, who entered into an agreement for house construction. The defendant failed to refund the amount paid by the plaintiff after withdrawing from the contract.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to realise an amount of Rs. 1,52,405/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff. The court ordered the defendant to pay a total of Rs. 1,52,405/- along with interest and costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff successfully proved her case through evidence.
The plaintiff successfully proved her case through evidence.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff successfully proved her case through evidence.
The plaintiff successfully proved her case through evidence.
Supporting Evidence
By producing Exts. A1 to A5 and by deposing in tune with the plaint averments in the affidavit, the plaintiff has succeeded in proving her case.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: (i) The plaintiff is entitled to realise an amount of Rs. 1,52,405/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization from the defendant and from his assets.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Margaret Paious
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vinod Kumar
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Building construction agreement dated 28/04/2018, Agreement dated 13/06/2018, Office copy of Lawyer’s notice dated 21/11/2019, Postal receipt, Returned postal articles.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V. Dayas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- G. Gopakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Gokul P. Raj
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Karthika. M
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs. 1,52,405/- along with interest.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realise an amount of Rs. 1,52,405/- (Rupees One lakh fifty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Five only) together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization from the defendant and from his assets.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Building construction agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as the agreement between the plaintiff and defendant for the construction work, outlining the terms and timeline.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a follow-up agreement where the defendant agreed to repay the balance amount owed to the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Office copy of Lawyer’s Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows that the plaintiff demanded payment from the defendant, including interest.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as proof of sending the notice to the defendant regarding the demand for payment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Returned postal articles
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as evidence of the returned notice, indicating that the defendant did not respond.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kollam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kollam
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Margaret Paious vs Vinod Kumar regarding recovery of money
Case Code Year
Case between Margaret Paious vs Vinod Kumar regarding recovery of money