Case Summary
The plaintiffs, a husband and wife, are suing the defendant for failing to return a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- they paid for leasing a property. The defendant did not hand over possession of the property as promised, leading the plaintiffs to seek recovery of the amount paid along with interest.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiffs are allowed to realize an amount of Rs.5,50,000/- from the defendant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum till realization.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing them to recover Rs.5,50,000/- from the defendant along with interest and costs. The defendant failed to fulfill the contractual obligations relating to the lease agreement.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs proved their case beyond a preponderance of probabilities with sufficient evidence of the financial transactions between the parties.
The plaintiffs proved their case beyond a preponderance of probabilities with sufficient evidence of the financial transactions between the parties.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs proved their case beyond a preponderance of probabilities with sufficient evidence of the financial transactions between the parties.
The plaintiffs proved their case beyond a preponderance of probabilities with sufficient evidence of the financial transactions between the parties.
Supporting Evidence
The substantive evidence given by PW1 regarding the transaction leading to the issuance of cheques was not shaken during cross-examination.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows; (i) The plaintiffs are allowed to realize an amount of Rs.5,50,000/- from the defendant and her assets with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree...
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mr.Tomy Sebasyian
- Party Age
- 51
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mrs. Jolly Tomy Sebasyian
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mrs. Mini Harikumar
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Rent agreement dated 05.12.2014, Original cheque bearing No. 738744, Original cheque bearing No. 738745, Lawyer’s notice dated 21.11.2017.
Defendants Documents
Original agreement dated 01.11.2014.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Frijo K. Sundaram
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C. Anilkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Johnson M.J.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Hireesheekesan S.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Biju Abraham
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Asha B. Mathews
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs sought to recover Rs.5,50,000 from the defendant.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree for realization of Rs.5,50,000/-.
Relief Type:
Costs
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to recover costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
The plaintiffs are entitled to get the costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Rent Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Executed between the 2nd plaintiff and the defendant, establishing the agreement for lease.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Original Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Issued by the defendant to the 1st plaintiff for Rs.2,50,000.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Original Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Issued by the defendant to the 1st plaintiff for Rs.3,00,000.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer’s Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notifying the defendant about the dishonour of the cheques.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Lawyer’s Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another notice sent to the defendant regarding the dishonoured cheques.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Postal Receipts
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of dispatch of notices to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6 and A7 series
Document Type:
Returned Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Cover containing the lawyer's notice returned from the defendant's address.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Returned Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Cover containing the lawyer's notice returned from the defendant's address.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Returned Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another returned cover related to the notice.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Returned Cover
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Cover containing the lawyer's notice returned from the defendant's address.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Certificate of cheque dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicating dishonour of the cheque dated 08.11.2017.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Certificate of cheque dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indicating dishonour of the cheque dated 14.11.2017.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
Original agreement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Marked subject to objection, the defendant claims this agreement.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Dishonour of cheque
Case Code
Case between Mr.Tomy Sebasyian et al vs Mrs. Mini Harikumar regarding Suit For Realization of Money
Case Code Year
Case between Mr.Tomy Sebasyian et al vs Mrs. Mini Harikumar regarding Suit For Realization of Money
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act