Case Summary
Mithun Andrews, a contractor, filed a suit against Aiju.K.Mani for unpaid construction work. The defendant denied any default in payment, claiming the plaintiff failed to complete the work as agreed.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit has been dismissed as the plaintiff failed to prove his claim against the defendant. The court found that the plaintiff did not complete essential stages of work as per the contract.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish any breach on the part of the defendant and did not prove entitlement to any relief.
The plaintiff failed to establish any breach on the part of the defendant and did not prove entitlement to any relief.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff's evidence was weakened by material admissions, and he failed to sustain his claims due to lack of documentation.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mithun Andrews
- Party Age
- 30
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Aiju.K.Mani
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Annamma Varghese
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Contract Agreement No. A1, Lawyers Notice A2, Police Complaint A3.
Defendants Documents
Statement of Account B1, Transfer records B2, Statement of Account of Annamma Varghese B3.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- N.T.Gopakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Ajithkumar.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Claim for recovery of balance amount due from the defendant.
Evidence:
The plaintiff has failed to establish any breach on the part of the defendant or any legally recoverable loss.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Contract agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original Contract Agreement executed between the parties.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lawyers notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The True copy of Lawyers Notice.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The certified copy of the complaint given by Aiju.K.Mani to the S.I of Police, Pampady Police Station.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Postal Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The returned Postal cover.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The Statement of Account of Aiju.K.Mani at Sundram Home Finance Limited, Kayamkulam for the period 07.09.2020 to 21.10.2021.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Transfer Record
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The transfer record of amounts transferred to the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The Statement of Account of Annamma Varghese at South Indian Bank, Kottayam Branch for the period 01.01.2021 to 31.08.2021.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Estimate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The Abstract Estimate for the construction of Residential Building.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The original Power of Attorney executed by the Defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Commission Report related to the construction work.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Sketch
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch related to the construction.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Photographs and CD
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Photographs and CD related to the commission report.
Reference:
Ext.C1(b)
Document Type:
Expert Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Expert Report assessing the construction work.
Reference:
Ext.C1(c)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2021