Case Summary
The plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Thomas, is seeking repayment of a staff security deposit and salary arrears from the defendants, who did not appear in court. The court found in favor of the plaintiff due to lack of rebuttal evidence from the defendants.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendants to pay to the plaintiff ₹7,53,976/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to pay ₹7,53,976/- along with interest.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaint averments, affidavit and documents established the plaintiff's case with no evidence to rebut it.
The plaint averments, affidavit and documents established the plaintiff's case with no evidence to rebut it.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaint averments, affidavit and documents established the plaintiff's case with no evidence to rebut it.
The plaint averments, affidavit and documents established the plaintiff's case with no evidence to rebut it.
Supporting Evidence
The plaint averments, affidavit and the documents would establish the case of the plaintiff. There is no evidence to rebut the evidence adduced on the side of the plaintiff. Hence the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs as claimed for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows; It is ordered that the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the sum of ₹7,53,976/- (Rupees seven lakhs fifty three thousand nine hundred and seventy six only) with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till its realization.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mary Elizabeth Thomas
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Principal, M/s Gurudeva Institute of Science and Technology
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s S N Trust
- Relation
- represented by Chairman, M Madhu
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s S N Trust
- Relation
- represented by Secretary, R Rajeev
Plaintiffs Documents
02.11.2016 Staff Security Deposit Receipt, 14.11.2016 Appointment Order, 24.07.2024 Conduct Certificate, 13.05.2025 Lawyer’s notice, 13.05.2025 Postal Receipt, 15.05.2025 A/D Card, 13.05.2025 Returned registered cover with A/D.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Rajeev P Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Anagha J
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Aarcha Nair M
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sneha Sara Saji
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arun Sasi
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Gowri V Nair
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Nigil George Thomas
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- V D Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Damages
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The defendants are ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of ₹7,53,976/- with interest.
Evidence:
It is ordered that the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the sum of ₹7,53,976/- (Rupees seven lakhs fifty three thousand nine hundred and seventy six only) with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till its realization.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover costs from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realise the costs from the defendants.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Staff Security Deposit Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt evidences the plaintiff's deposit of Rs. 5,00,000/- as security deposit which is central to the claim for its refund.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Appointment Order
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the employment of the plaintiff at the institution.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Conduct Certificate
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This certificate is likely relevant to the plaintiff's previous employment history.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer’s Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The notice served to the defendants evidences the plaintiff's demand for the repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt evidences the sending of the lawyer's notice to the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
A/d Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This card confirms that the notice was received by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Returned registered cover with A/D (including notice)
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the return of the notice, showing the defendants' non-response.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between Mary Elizabeth Thomas vs The Principal, M/s Gurudeva Institute of Science and Technology et al regarding realisation of money.
Case Code Year
Case between Mary Elizabeth Thomas vs The Principal, M/s Gurudeva Institute of Science and Technology et al regarding realisation of money.
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt