Skip to main content
Niyamam AI- Beta Niyamam AI- Beta

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
O.S No. 894/2019

Case between M/s. Sunitha Sales & Service (P) Ltd. vs Ananthu Sukumaran regarding damages for breach of indemnity bond

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Rohit Nandakumar
Order Date
2025-01-25
Duration
approximately-7 years 11 days

Judgement document from eCourt website

Open judgment PDF (eCourt)
Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M/s. Sunitha Sales & Service (P) Ltd. filed a suit against Ananthu Sukumaran for damages after he resigned from his position before the completion of the bond period. The plaintiff claims losses incurred due to the defendant's abrupt resignation.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court dismissed the suit, ruling that the plaintiff failed to prove damages suffered due to the defendant's actions. Both parties were ordered to bear their own costs.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish that they suffered any actual loss as a result of the defendant's resignation.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed. The parties are directed to suffer their respective costs to the suit.

Parties Involved

Plaintiffs

M/s. Sunitha Sales & Service (P) Ltd. (Age not specified years) Bldg No: XIX/172, P.B. No.20, Hill Palace Road, Tripunithura, Kochi- 682 301 Mr. Karthik Job (Age not specified years) Bldg No: XIX/172, P.B. No.20, Hill Palace Road, Tripunithura, Kochi- 682 301 Mr. V.R. Vamanan (62 years) Vadakkevelikkakathu, Puthiyakavu, Tripunithura, Pin - 682 301

Defendants

Ananthu Sukumaran (24 years) Kunnel House, Mulakulam North P.O, Piravom Desom, Muvattupuzha, Pin-686 664

Reliefs

Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Rejected
Description:
Damages of ₹1,21,760 were claimed for losses incurred due to the defendant's abrupt resignation.
Evidence:
The plaintiff has miserably failed to prove a case in their favour and that the plaintiff is not entitled to reliefs in their favour as sought for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Power of Attorney
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Power of Attorney was submitted, establishing representation of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Appointment Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Appointment Order detailing the terms of employment for the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Indemnity Bond
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Indemnity bond entered into by the defendant regarding employment terms.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of lawyer notice sent to the defendant demanding payment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt related to the lawyer notice sent to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment Card confirming receipt of the lawyer notice by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
Case Filed
Wed, 03/01/2017 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases