Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 1194/2019

Case between Renu Thomas vs Sunil Kumar Thankappan regarding realization of money

Court
I ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Padmakumar.G.
Order Date
2024-03-27
Duration
approximately-4 years 9 months
Case Closed
Wed, 03/27/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Renu Thomas filed a suit against Sunil Kumar Thankappan for the realization of a sum of Rs. 4,70,000/- which she claims was paid for the registration of an apartment. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant misappropriated the funds and failed to fulfill his agreement to repay the amount.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the defendant, dismissing the suit due to lack of evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims. The court noted inconsistencies in the plaintiff's case and failure to prove the alleged debt.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the defendant, dismissing the suit due to lack of evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims. The court noted inconsistencies in the plaintiff's case and failure to prove the alleged debt.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff could not substantiate her claims with sufficient documentary evidence.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff could not substantiate her claims with sufficient documentary evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff could not prove that there is an enforceable debt the defendant owes him. Therefore, the suit is found to be devoid of merits and is only liable to be dismissed.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Renu Thomas
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sunil Kumar Thankappan
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Sale agreement dated 25.06.12, Original Sale deed dated 06.08.14, Original agreement dated 18.09.16, Copy of complaint dated 07.06.19, Copy of lawyer notice dated 28.06.19.
Defendants Documents
Nil

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Abraham Joseph Markos
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Alexander Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sharad Joseph Kodainthara
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Vipin Anto U.M.
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Jimmy John Vellanikaran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiff requested to recover a sum of Rs. 4,70,000/- from the defendant.
Evidence:
Therefore, the suit is found to be devoid of merits and is only liable to be dismissed.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Sale Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It serves as evidence of the initial sale agreement for the apartment.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Original Sale Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It serves as evidence of the legal registration of the apartment in plaintiff's name.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Original agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is the agreement acknowledging the repayment terms established between the plaintiff and defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Copy of Agreement with defendant
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It provides a copy of the agreement that outlines the repayment plan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Copy of complaint
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is the complaint lodged against the defendant regarding his failure to repay the amount.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Copy of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is the legal notice sent to the defendant demanding repayment of the owed amount.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Original Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It serves as proof of the dispatch of the legal notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Original acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It is proof of receipt confirmation of the legal notice by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A8

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Renu Thomas vs Sunil Kumar Thankappan regarding realization of money
Case Code Year
Case between Renu Thomas vs Sunil Kumar Thankappan regarding realization of money

Quick Facts

Location
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Tue, 01/01/2019 - 12:00
Case Closed
Wed, 03/27/2024 - 12:00
From
Fri, 03/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sun, 03/31/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between T.O Abraham et al vs T.O Aleyas et al regarding settlement of the suit
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Dismissed
Case between Prakash Pai, et al vs Saju, et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Nithya vs Babu et al regarding Dismissal of Listed Case
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Kunju Bava vs C. A Abdulla regarding specific performance of agreement and consequential reliefs
The Court of the Principal Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Unknown
Case between Ammini M.N et al vs Sindhu et al regarding undisclosed matter
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Defendant Won