Case between M/s Skyline Systems & Services vs Jaison A A regarding recovery of money

Case Summary

The case involves M/s Skyline Systems & Services seeking to recover Rs. 65,515/- from Jaison A A with interest, following an error in the amount stated in the original documents. The plaintiff has filed petitions to recall a witness and accept an additional affidavit to rectify a typographical mistake.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won

Interim Order

The petitions filed by the plaintiff to recall a witness and to accept an additional affidavit were dismissed by the court. It was determined that reopening evidence was not appropriate at this stage.

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

No

The petitions filed by the plaintiff to recall a witness and to accept an additional affidavit were dismissed by the court. It was determined that reopening evidence was not appropriate at this stage.

Key Reasoning:
The petitions were deemed to have no merit and were seen as attempts to protract the proceedings.

Why Defendant Won:
The petitions were deemed to have no merit and were seen as attempts to protract the proceedings.

Supporting Evidence

Therefore this court is satisfied that the present petition is only filed with an intention to protract the proceedings and without any merits.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, Petitions are dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their respective costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: M/s Skyline Systems & Services

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Joseph Philip
Party Age: 64
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Leya Susan Varghese
Party Age: 42
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Jaison A A

Plaintiffs Documents

Proof affidavit sworn by PW1, Invoice.

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: S Sudhish Kumar
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sibi Karun
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Ajay N S
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Baby Kuttan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Varghesekutty
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Other

Outcome: Refused

Description:

Petitions to recall PW1 and accept the additional proof affidavit.

Evidence:

Accordingly, I find no merit in the above petitions.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Additional Documents

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

These documents were marked subject to proof and can be adduced subsequently without recalling PW1 as the evidence of plaintiff is not closed.

Reference:

Ext.A1, A3, A4 and A5

Case Classification