Case Summary
The plaintiff, Nidhin Babu, claims that the defendant, Prasanth, borrowed ₹. 2,00,000/- and failed to repay it, leading to a suit for recovery. The court determined that the plaintiff is entitled to the claimed amount with interest due to the defendant's dishonored cheque.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff firm is allowed to realize the plaint claim of ₹.2,14,265/- and also to realize 9% interest from the defendant.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing the recovery of ₹. 2,14,265/- along with interest from the defendant.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff provided unrebutted evidence establishing the loan and dishonor of the cheque.
The plaintiff provided unrebutted evidence establishing the loan and dishonor of the cheque.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff provided unrebutted evidence establishing the loan and dishonor of the cheque.
The plaintiff provided unrebutted evidence establishing the loan and dishonor of the cheque.
Supporting Evidence
From the unrebutted evidence adduced by plaintiff, I hold that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief as prayed for.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: The plaintiff firm is allowed to realize the plaint claim of ₹.2,14,265/- and also to realize 9% interest from the defendant.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Nidhin Babu
- Party Age
- 36
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prasanth
- Party Age
- 37
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original cheque No.016666, Dishonour Memo, Copy of legal notice, Postal receipt, A/D Card
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- M P Muraleedharan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is allowed to recover the amount claimed along with interest.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: The plaintiff firm is allowed to realize the plaint claim of ₹.2,14,265/- and also to realize 9% interest from the defendant.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original cheque issued by the defendant in favor of the plaintiff was used as evidence for the claim.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The dishonour memo from the bank was used to establish that the cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The copy of the legal notice was evidence that the plaintiff formally notified the defendant about the cheque dishonour.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The postal receipt was used to confirm that the legal notice was sent to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
A/d Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The A/D card confirmed receipt of the legal notice by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Vaikom
Common Reasons
Cheque dishonour
Case Code
Case between Nidhin Babu vs Prasanth regarding Suit for realisation of money.
Case Code Year
Case between Nidhin Babu vs Prasanth regarding Suit for realisation of money.
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Arrest Involved
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act