Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. No.1327/2018

Case between M/s. Dynamic Architectural Hardware vs Itty M. regarding recovery of money

Court
THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. REEJA R. NAIR.
Order Date
2024-06-04
Duration
approximately-5 years 6 months
Case Closed
Tue, 06/04/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M/s. Dynamic Architectural Hardware is suing Itty M. for recovery of an outstanding balance from hardware purchases. The plaintiff claims the defendant owes ₹68,078 due to unpaid invoices.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ordered the defendant to pay ₹68,078 along with interest and costs to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s claims were substantiated by sufficient evidence.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is directed to pay ₹68,078 and costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ordered the defendant to pay ₹68,078 along with interest and costs to the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s claims were substantiated by sufficient evidence.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff established the outstanding balance through ledger accounts and invoices.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The ledger accounts and the invoices marked as Exts.A1 to A4 shows the outstanding amount due to the plaintiff by the defendant. The evidence of PW1 and PW2 and Exts.A1 to A9 proves the case of PW1 and he is entitled to get a decree as prayed for.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed as follows: Defendant is directed to pay an amount of ₹68,078 and 9% interest from date of suit till date of decree, and thereafter till the date of recovery at the rate of 6% interest. Defendant is directed to pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M/s. Dynamic Architectural Hardware
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Itty M.
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of ledger Account statement for the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015, Certified Copy of ledger Account statement for the period from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016, The certified copy of invoice No. 10395 dated 23.11.2015, The certified copy of invoice No. 10698 dated 30.11.2015, Lawyer notice dated 25.10.2018, Acknowledgment card.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Ajith Prakash
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Paul C. Thomas
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Generous Pallath
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendant is directed to pay an amount of 68,078/- with interest.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed as follows: Defendant is directed to pay an amount of 68,078/- (Rupees Sixty Eight Thousand and Seventy Eight Only) and 9% interest from date of suit till date of decree.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendant is directed to pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.
Evidence:
Defendant is directed to pay costs of the suit to the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Ledger Account Statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of ledger account statement for the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Ledger Account Statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of ledger account statement for the period from 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of invoice No. 10395 dated 23.11.2015.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of invoice No. 10698 dated 30.11.2015.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Lawyer notice issued to the defendant demanding the outstanding balance.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment card signed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Bank statement with 65B certificate.
Reference:
Ext.A9

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between M/s. Dynamic Architectural Hardware vs Itty M. regarding recovery of money
Case Code Year
Case between M/s. Dynamic Architectural Hardware vs Itty M. regarding recovery of money

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Thu, 10/25/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 06/04/2024 - 12:00
From
Sat, 06/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sun, 06/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between M/s. Thoppil Fincorp et al vs Navas A.A et al regarding realization of money
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Nikhil.N. Asher vs Plymart et al regarding suit for realization of money.
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s Space International Air Travels (P) Ltd. vs Tapovan Impex Private Limited regarding recovery of money
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Transformers and Electrical Industries vs M/s. Ambatt Electricals regarding realization of money.
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Transformers and Electrical Industries vs M/s. Kureekode Agencies regarding realization of money.
COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won