Case Summary
Anoop P C filed a suit against Amrutha Kumar seeking recovery of Rs. 6,00,000/- based on a promissory note and dishonored cheques. The plaintiff claims he invested the money under the defendant's advice and has not been repaid.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit, concluding that the plaintiff failed to prove his case with reliable evidence.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff could not prove the execution of the promissory note or the cheques.
The plaintiff could not prove the execution of the promissory note or the cheques.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff could not prove the execution of the promissory note or the cheques.
The plaintiff could not prove the execution of the promissory note or the cheques.
Supporting Evidence
The court found that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff and he failed to sufficiently discharge it.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Anoop P C
- Party Age
- 29
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Amrutha Kumar
- Party Age
- 59
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original receipt issued by the Federal Bank, Original of the promissory note, Original Cheque No. 356473, Original Cheque No. 356475, Legal notice issued to defendant
Defendants Documents
Printout of the price rate of gold during the November 2015
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreejith S Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Libin Stanley
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A T Anilkumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- K R Benraj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Jose Paul Thottam
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Fathima Razak
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Aishwarya Sajeev
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiff sought a decree for the recovery of Rs. 6,00,000/- from the defendant.
Evidence:
Hence in both cases the burden lies upon the plaintiff cannot be said to have been discharged by the available evidence on record.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original receipt issued by Federal Bank to show that Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited on 02.01.2013 to the account of defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original receipt issued by Federal Bank to show that Rs. 1,00,000/- was deposited on 18.11.2015 to the account of defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Promissory Note
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original promissory note whereby defendant agreed to repay Rs. 6,00,000/- within a span of 9 months.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Cheque no: 356473 for Rs. 1,50,000/- dated 05.05.2016 issued by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Cheque no: 356475 for Rs. 1,50,000/- dated 08.05.2016 issued by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original dishonour memo indicating that both cheques were dishonoured on 11.07.2016.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The original dishonour memo indicating that both cheques were dishonoured on 11.07.2016.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of lawyer notice demanding payment as per the promissory note.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Gold Price Rate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Printout of the price rate of gold during November 2015 to challenge financial claims.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Gold Price Rate Certification
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Certification under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam related to gold price.
Reference:
Ext.B1(a)
Document Type:
Account Opening Form
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Account opening form in the name of Amrutha Kumar.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type:
Account Statement
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Account statement in the name of Amrutha Kumar for the period 02.01.2013 to 05.01.2013.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Document Type:
Account Statement
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Account statement in the name of Amrutha Kumar for the period 18.11.2015 to 25.11.2015.
Reference:
Ext.X2(b)
Document Type:
Counter Foil
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of counter foil dated 18.11.15.
Reference:
Ext.X3
Document Type:
Account Opening Form
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of account opening form in the name of Anoop P C.
Reference:
Ext.X4
Document Type:
Account Statement
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Account Statement of Anoop P C from 01.01.2013 to 10.01.2013.
Reference:
Ext.X5
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Certified copy of Cheque no: 044924 dated 02.01.2013.
Reference:
Ext.X6
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 Anoop P C vs Amrutha Kumar regarding realization of money
Case Code Year
Case between Anoop P C vs Amrutha Kumar regarding realization of money
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act