Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S. 251/2023

Case between Union Bank of India vs Abdul Karim regarding realization of money

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Judge
Smitha Susan Mathew
Order Date
2025-10-31
Duration
approximately-5 years 4 months 19 days
Case Code No.
251
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Union Bank of India, is a banking company seeking to recover a loan amount from the defendant, Abdul Karim. The defendant failed to repay the loan, which led to this suit for recovery.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit was decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing the recovery of the loan amount along with interest and costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹5,98,871/- and interest at the rate of 10.50% per annum from the date of the suit.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing the recovery of the loan amount along with interest and costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found sufficient evidence produced by the plaintiff to establish the defendant's liability.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found sufficient evidence produced by the plaintiff to establish the defendant's liability.
Supporting Evidence
These documents are sufficient to show the liability of the defendants towards plaintiff. Defendants could not rebut the evidence produced by the plaintiff.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows:- 1The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹5,98,871/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy One only) ...

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Union Bank of India
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Abdul Karim
Party Age
59
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Loan application dated 12/06/2020, Hypothecation agreement, Sanction letter, Demand promissory note, Interest agreement, Letter of continuity, Debit balance confirmation, Acknowledgment card.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Clareness Joseph
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Nrupan Vadakkan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹5,98,871/- as on the date of suit.
Evidence:
Hence the court is of the view that the plaintiff is entitled for a decree for recovery of the claim amount.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to get interest on ₹5,98,871/- from the date of suit till date of decree.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is also entitled to get interest at the rate of 10.50% per annum on ₹5,98,871/- from the date of suit till date of decree.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to realize the costs of the suit from the defendant.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to realize the costs of the suit from the defendant and his assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Loan Application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document submitted by the plaintiff showing the loan application by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Hypothecation Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Agreement evidencing the hypothecation of assets against the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sanction letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter from the bank sanctioning the loan amount.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Demand Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Promissory note executed by the defendant agreeing to repay the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Interest Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document detailing the interest obligations on the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Letter of Continuity
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter confirming the continuous nature of the loan agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Debit Balance confirmation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document acknowledging the outstanding balance on the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified statement showing the transaction history and outstanding amount.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent to the defendant regarding the outstanding payment.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt of postal communications sent by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Card acknowledging receipt of notices sent by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: Demand Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Another promissory note executed by the defendant for additional loan.
Reference:
Ext.A12

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2023

Quick Facts

Location
Kanjirappally
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Case Filed
Fri, 06/12/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between State Bank of India, Thalayolaparambu Branch vs Manoj.P.C. regarding realization of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, VAIKOM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Vishnu T. Nair regarding realization of money.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Raju Sebastian regarding realization of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Union Bank of India vs Aswathy Purushothaman et al regarding realization of money
THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Mathew Skariah et al regarding Suit for realisation of money.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KOTTAYAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won