Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S 223/2024

Case between Union Bank of India vs M/s Sara Opticals regarding realization of money

Court
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Judge
Smt. Smitha Susan Mathew
Order Date
2025-09-09
Duration
approximately-2 years 5 months
Case Code No.
223
Case Closed
Tue, 09/09/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Union Bank of India as the plaintiff seeking to recover a loan amount from M/s Sara Opticals, represented by its Proprietor Geevarughese T.G. The defendant defaulted on loan repayments, prompting the bank to file this suit.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the outstanding loan amount along with interest.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹9,38,105/- and interest at the rate of 9.30% per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the outstanding loan amount along with interest.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff presented sufficient evidence showing the liability of the defendants towards the plaintiff.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff presented sufficient evidence showing the liability of the defendants towards the plaintiff.
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: The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹9,38,105/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Five only) as on the date of suit.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Union Bank of India
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s Sara Opticals
Party Age
43
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Loan application dated 23.03.2023, Sanction advice dated 17/04/2023, Term loan agreement, Interest agreement.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Joy K. George
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
P.A Salim
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff was entitled to recover the outstanding loan amount along with interest.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: The plaintiff is entitled to realize ₹9,38,105/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs Thirty Eight Thousand One Hundred and Five only) as on the date of suit.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff was entitled to recover 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:
Produced as evidence of the loan application made by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Credit information
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Submitted to establish the credit background of the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Sanction advice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the sanctioning of the loan by the plaintiff bank.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Memorandum
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Related to the sanctioning authority of the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Standard Terms and Conditions
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Part of the agreement for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Terms and Conditions of sanction
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details the terms under which the loan was issued.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Term Loan agreement (Hypothecation of Movable)
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Describes the loan and hypothecation of movable assets.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Interest Agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Specifies the interest terms of the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Demand Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Act as a formal promise to pay the loan amount.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type: Letter of Continuity
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Defines continuity of the loan terms.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: AD-02A
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document executed by the defendant regarding the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: Letter of Undertaking from Borrower(s)
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Confirms the borrower's commitments related to the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type: Letter of Undertaking Not to Alienate Hypothecated Goods
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Guarantees that the borrower will not alienate secured assets.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: Memorandum of deposit of title deeds
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the deposit of title deeds as security for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document regarding property division, related to loan security.
Reference:
Ext.A15
Document Type: Rectification Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Corrects previous records related to asset holdings.
Reference:
Ext.A16
Document Type: Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Details a sale related to assets securing the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A17
Document Type: Account Statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Shows the loan balance and payment history.
Reference:
Ext.A18

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
O.S
Case Code Year
2024

Quick Facts

Location
Kanjirappally, Kottayam District
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Kanjirappally
Case Filed
Thu, 03/23/2023 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 09/09/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 10/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Josbish Kurian regarding realization of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Joshy George regarding realization of money.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Anilkumar K.K. et al regarding realization of money
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Jayakumar P.N. regarding realization of money.
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Anishkumar K.C. regarding realization of money.
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, KANJIRAPPALLY
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won