Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O. S. No.330/2024

Case between Speed Pack vs A A Marketings regarding outstanding payment

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Judge
Smt. Sumey Chandran
Order Date
2025-11-22
Duration
approximately-4 years 11 days
Case Closed
Sat, 11/22/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Speed Pack, filed a suit against the defendant, A A Marketings, for the recovery of outstanding payments for goods sold on credit. The court found that the defendant failed to honor the payments despite being reminded multiple times.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff with costs, directing the defendant to pay Rs. 4,33,250/- along with interest to the plaintiff. The judgment reflects the failure of the defendant to pay outstanding dues.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The defendant is directed to pay the amount of Rs. 4,33,250/- to the plaintiff firm along with 9% interest from the date of suit till the date of decree.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed in favor of the plaintiff with costs, directing the defendant to pay Rs. 4,33,250/- along with interest to the plaintiff. The judgment reflects the failure of the defendant to pay outstanding dues.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff was unchallenged and proved the defendant's liability.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff was unchallenged and proved the defendant's liability.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence tendered by PW1 and the documents marked as Ext.A1 to A11 stands unchallenged. No contra evidence adduced. In the absence of any contra evidence, the unchallenged evidence of PW1 and the documents marked as Ext.A1 to A11 proves the case of the plaintiff.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows:- The defendant is hereby directed to pay the amount of Rs. 4,33,250/- to the plaintiff firm along with 9% per annum as interest from the date of suit till the date of decree and with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum, till realisation.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Speed Pack
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
A A Marketings
Plaintiffs Documents
Statement of Account for 2022-23, Statement of Account for 2023-24, Tax Invoices from 27/11/2021 to 24/12/2021, Lawyer notice dated 12/12/2023, Reply notice dated 06/01/2024
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K P Vinod
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
V R Sudheer
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is directed to pay the amount due to the plaintiff along with interest.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: The defendant is hereby directed to pay the amount of Rs. 4,33,250/- to the plaintiff firm along with 9% per annum as interest from the date of suit till the date of decree and with future interest at the rate of 6% per annum, till realisation.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the transactions and outstanding amount due to the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proves the transactions for the period of 2023-24.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Tax Invoice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a specific transaction showing the goods purchased.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Office copy of the lawyer notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Demands payment of the outstanding dues.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Response to the lawyer notice.
Reference:
Ext.A11

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between Speed Pack vs A A Marketings regarding outstanding payment
Case Code Year
Case between Speed Pack vs A A Marketings regarding outstanding payment

Quick Facts

Location
Perumbavoor
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Perumbavoor
Case Filed
Sat, 11/27/2021 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 11/22/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 11/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 11/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between M/s. Chaithanya Enterprises et al vs Shibu P Paul et al regarding recovery of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Speed Pack vs Arafa Marketing regarding recovery of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Speed Pack vs Babiyos Marketing regarding recovery of money
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between M/s. Matrix Finbiz Pvt. Ltd vs Nishad M.M., Najeeba Nishad, Ibrahamkutty M.M. regarding realization of money.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs M/s Global Enterprises regarding realization of money.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, PERUMBAVOOR
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won