O.S. No. 1038 of 2018

Case between Pureflames Appliances (Pvt) Ltd. vs Mrs. Priti Agarwal et al regarding mandatory injunction

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Smt. Rejani Thankappan
Order Date
2024-01-31
Duration
approximately-6 years 3 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Pureflames Appliances (Pvt) Ltd., has filed a suit against the defendants including Mrs. Priti Agarwal and others, seeking a mandatory injunction for the return of goods and a bank guarantee. Disputes arose over an oral agreement related to business operations and the alleged failure of the defendants to fulfill their obligations.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the 1st defendant to return the goods and the original bank guarantee issued by the 3rd defendant bank. The plaintiff is also entitled to the costs of the suit.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Mandatory injunction for the return of goods and bank guarantee
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the 1st defendant to return the goods and the original bank guarantee issued by the 3rd defendant bank. The plaintiff is also entitled to the costs of the suit.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff sufficiently proved the existence of an oral agreement and the failure of the 1st defendant to fulfill contractual obligations.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff sufficiently proved the existence of an oral agreement and the failure of the 1st defendant to fulfill contractual obligations.
Supporting Evidence
The 1st defendant failed to appoint sales personnel and to take steps for sale of goods supplied to the 2nd defendant thereby the 1st defendant failed to perform his part of the oral agreement.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: A) The 1st defendant is directed by way of mandatory injunction to take back the goods supplied to the plaintiff company vide invoice No. 2017/18-34 dated 21.01.2018 and to return the original bank guarantee No.IBG82004 dated 08.12.2017 issued by 3rd defendant bank in the name of the 1st defendant to the plaintiff company.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Pureflames Appliances (Pvt) Ltd.
Relation
Represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mrs. Priti Agarwal
Party Age
32
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mr. Raman Chopra
Party Age
52
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
The Federal Bank Limited
Plaintiffs Documents
Board of Resolution dated 11.12.2023, GST Tax invoice No. 2017/18-34, Original bank guarantee dated 08.12.2017
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P. Viswanathan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Shibu Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sanu.S.Malakeel
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Anoopa M.J
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Anupama.R
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Prerith Philip Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Princy Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
C.A Majeed
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Asif K.H.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Abhai Shankar.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Madhusoodanan.K
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Paul T.G
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Mathew Jacob
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Syriac Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Mandatory Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Directing the 1st defendant to take back the goods and return the original bank guarantee.
Evidence:
The 1st defendant is directed by way of mandatory injunction to take back the goods supplied to the plaintiff company vide invoice No.2017/18­34 dated 21.01.2018 and to return the original bank guarantee No.IBG82004 dated 08.12.2017 issued by 3rd defendant bank in the name of 1st defendant to the plaintiff company.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to get costs from the 1st defendant.
Evidence:
Considering the nature of the suit plaintiff is entitled to get costs from the 1st defendant.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Board Resolution
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Authorizes the Director of the plaintiff company to give evidence in the case.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Goods and Service Tax Details
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Provides tax details relevant to the plaintiff company.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Agency Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the agency agreement dated June 2017 for the transaction.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Bank Guarantee
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Photocopy of the bank guarantee issued in favor of the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: GST Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Invoice for delivery of goods from the 1st defendant to the 2nd defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Destination Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt issued for the transportation of goods.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Email Communication
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Communication regarding the negotiation with the 2nd defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Email Communication
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Communication informing about the goods lying in the godown.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice informing about the rescindment of the oral agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Report filed by the Advocate Commissioner regarding the goods.
Reference:
Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Fraud
Case Code
Case between Pureflames Appliances (Pvt) Ltd. vs Mrs. Priti Agarwal et al regarding mandatory injunction
Case Code Year
Case between Pureflames Appliances (Pvt) Ltd. vs Mrs. Priti Agarwal et al regarding mandatory injunction

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Mon, 01/01/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Mon, 01/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Wed, 01/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Garden View Apartment owners Association vs Ansal River Dale owners Association et al regarding Restoration Petition
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Shanoj R vs Joseph Augustin et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s Indo Quartz vs M/s Ray Engineering Pvt. Ltd. et al regarding petition under Order 38 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure.
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Canton Residency Pvt. Ltd. vs Kalamassery Municipality regarding dismissal of suit
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Mrs. Julie Sebastian vs SREECHAND SPECIALITY HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. regarding settlement of claims.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won