Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 212/2022

Case between M.B. Jayan vs K. Sunil Kumar regarding loan repayment

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-11-29
Duration
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M.B. Jayan filed a suit against K. Sunil Kumar for recovery of ₹2,29,000 which he claims to have lent to Sunil. The defendant denied borrowing the money and alleged the suit is based on fabricated claims.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim of lending money to the defendant.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was dismissed as the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim of lending money to the defendant.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff could not substantiate his claims with credible evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff's claims were not supported by adequate proof, leading to the dismissal of the suit.

Judgment Evidence:

The suit is dismissed and parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M.B. Jayan
Party Age
57
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
K. Sunil Kumar
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Pocket Diary, Computer print out of the email communication, Computer Print out of Whatsapp message sent to the defendant, True copy of Complaint submitted before Sub Inspector of Police, True copy of registered letter, Returned Postal Envelope, Computer print out of Whatsapp message sent by the wife of the defendant, True copy of the lawyer notice.
Defendants Documents
Not Marked as they are not accepted vide Order dated 05.11.2025 in I.A 11/2025.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Joseph Edakatt
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Eldhose M. Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Shaijan Sha Ismail
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Plaintiff sought recovery of ₹2,29,000 from the defendant.
Evidence:
The suit is dismissed and parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Plaintiff also sought repayment of ₹6,000 for expenses incurred.
Evidence:
The suit is dismissed and parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Pocket Diary
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of transactions between the plaintiff and defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Computer print out of the email communication
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to objection, related to communication about money owed.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Computer Print out of Whatsapp message sent to the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to objection, related to communication demanding repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Computer Print out of Whatsapp message sent to the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Subject to objection, part of communication regarding loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: True copy of Complaint submitted before Sub Inspector of Police
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Related to police inquiry about the defendant's financial situation.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: True copy of registered letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Communication sent to the defendant regarding repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Returned Postal envelope
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicates failed communication attempts to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Computer print out of Whatsapp message sent by the wife of the defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Communication related to acknowledgment of loan transaction.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: True copy of the lawyer notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent to the defendant regarding the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Returned Postal cover
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicates returned communication attempts to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A11

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between M.B. Jayan vs K. Sunil Kumar regarding loan repayment
Case Code Year
Case between M.B. Jayan vs K. Sunil Kumar regarding loan repayment

Case Flags

Arrest Involved

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Case Closed
From
Sat, 11/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 11/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won