Case Summary
M/s.Polaris Associates, represented by its proprietor Mani V, has filed a suit against M/s.HSIL Ltd. and other defendants for the realization of money due to losses incurred from defective products. The plaintiff alleges that service issues and defective products from the defendants have caused significant financial damage.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Commercial Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found that the plaintiff failed to provide adequate evidence supporting the claim for damages. As a result, the suit was dismissed.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff could not substantiate the claims with sufficient evidence.
The plaintiff could not substantiate the claims with sufficient evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff could not substantiate the claims with sufficient evidence.
The plaintiff could not substantiate the claims with sufficient evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff has not produced any documents to show which items were defective and its value. He has also not taken any steps to value the defective goods lying in his godown.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- M/s.Polaris Associates
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s.HSIL Ltd.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- The Branch Head, Consumer Business Office, HSIL Ltd.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- M/s Somany Hone innovators Ltd.
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of distribution agreement, Copy of lawyer notice issued to defendants, Various email communications regarding damaged goods.
Defendants Documents
Distributorship Agreement, Copy of reply notice sent by defendants counsel to the plaintiff’s counsel.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.B.Sivaramakrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Akshay Kamath
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Susmith.K.T.D
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.Abdul Naser
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.G.Manoharlal
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff's claim for recovery of Rs. 16,02,154/- towards unsold/damaged goods.
Evidence:
In view of the findings in issue Nos.1 to 3, I find that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree as prayed for and the suit is dismissed.
Relief Type:
Damages
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff's claim for damages of Rs. 2,50,000/- due to inadequate service.
Evidence:
In view of the findings in issue Nos.1 to 3, I find that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree as prayed for and the suit is dismissed.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Distribution Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The distribution agreement outlines the terms under which the plaintiff was to distribute the defendant's products and includes provisions for returning unsold or damaged products.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was issued to inform the defendants about the plaintiff's demands regarding the outstanding amounts.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
An email from the plaintiff to the defendant detailing complaints regarding defective products.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another email showing the correspondence related to the defective goods.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further correspondence regarding the issues faced by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A letter from the defendant's company regarding product replacement inspections.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Gmail
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified email related to the dealings between the parties.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Gmail
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified email related to the dealings between the parties.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Mail
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified email reflecting further communications on the matters at hand.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Mail
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified email reflecting additional communications regarding the disputed amounts.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Bill
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified bill issued to the plaintiff, possibly related to the transactions in question.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Letter
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified letter issued to Somany Home Innovations Ltd. by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type:
Special Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document relating to the legal authority granted to an individual to act on behalf of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type:
Special Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document relating to the legal authority granted to an individual to act on behalf of the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Stock Summary
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
A certified stock summary intended to assist in proving the quantity and condition of goods in dispute.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type:
Distributorship Agreement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
This document outlines the distributorship agreement which is central to the dispute.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
A reply notice from the defendant's counsel disputing the claims made by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Intending Letter
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
A letter indicating the intentions of the defendant regarding the agreements.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Email
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
An email sent by the plaintiff outlining some of their claims.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Reply
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The defendant's response to the plaintiff regarding claims made.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Certified copy of Account statement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document showing the financial dealings between the parties.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type:
Minutes of Board Meetings
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Minutes that could provide insights into the business decisions made relevant to this case.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Case Classification
Case Type
Commercial Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Commercial Court Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between M/s.Polaris Associates vs M/s.HSIL Ltd., The Branch Head, Consumer Business Office, M/s Somany Hone innovators Ltd. regarding realisation of money
Case Code Year
Case between M/s.Polaris Associates vs M/s.HSIL Ltd., The Branch Head, Consumer Business Office, M/s Somany Hone innovators Ltd. regarding realisation of money
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt