Case between S.Venkateswar Viswanath vs Ramesh Vishwanathan et al regarding recovery of money.

Case Summary

The plaintiff, S.Venkateswar Viswanath, is involved in a suit against Ramesh Vishwanathan and his son Rahul Ramesh regarding the recovery of a fixed deposit amount with claimed interest. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants defrauded him under the pretense of managing a legitimate finance institution.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won

Interim Order

The court partially decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, ruling that the first defendant is liable to repay the principal amount along with interest, while finding insufficient evidence regarding the second defendant's involvement.

Judgment Favored

Plaintiff

Relief Granted

1,65,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization.

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

No

The court partially decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff, ruling that the first defendant is liable to repay the principal amount along with interest, while finding insufficient evidence regarding the second defendant's involvement.

Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found the first defendant liable due to his direct engagement with the plaintiff in accepting the fixed deposit.

Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found the first defendant liable due to his direct engagement with the plaintiff in accepting the fixed deposit.

Supporting Evidence

The plaintiff has failed to prove that the 2nd defendant has any liability to the plaintiff for the amount collected from the plaintiff by the 1st defendant.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed in part as follows, 1) The 1st defendant do pay to the plaintiff the sum of 1,65,000/- with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the suit till the date of realization of the said sum.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: S.Venkateswar Viswanath
Party Age: 26
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Ramesh Vishwanathan
Party Age: 57
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Rahul Ramesh
Party Age: 40
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Printout copy of the webpage of Ministry of Corporate Affairs showing the details of ‘Upayog Nidhi Limited’ company, Certified copy of the fixed deposit receipt bearing FDR no. 00012012.

Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Biju K Chacko
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Leena Joseph
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Ansa Eldhose
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Dr.Sajan Vazhappilly
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Varghese Vinu C.J
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: S.Russell
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Anto Thomas
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Vismaya Venugopal
Appearance Type: Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery

Outcome: Partly Granted

Description:

The plaintiff sought the return of the principal amount along with interest.

Evidence:

The 1st defendant is found liable to repay the amount deposited by the plaintiff with interest as promised.

Relief Type: Costs

Outcome: Granted

Description:

The plaintiff sought costs of the suit.

Evidence:

Hence, the issue as to costs is answered in favour of the plaintiff.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Printout copy of the webpage of Ministry of Corporate Affairs showing the details of 'Upayog Nidhi Limited' company

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

Marked subject of production of certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, since it was a printout.

Reference:

Ext.A1

Document Type: Certified copy of the fixed deposit receipt

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

Produced and marked as evidence of the amount deposited by the plaintiff.