Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S No. 48/2024

Case between Canara Bank vs Sangeeth Kumar P.S regarding recovery of money

Court
THE I ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Judge
Sri. Nanda Krishna M.
Order Date
2024-06-26
Duration
approximately-4 years 8 days
Case Closed
Wed, 06/26/2024 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Canara Bank, filed a suit against the defendant, Sangeeth Kumar P.S, for recovery of a loan amount due after the defendant failed to repay it despite several demands. The defendant was set ex parte for not appearing in court.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit was decreed directing the defendant to pay an amount of Rs. 97,800 with interest. In default, the plaintiff can recover the amount from the defendant's assets.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Defendant is directed to pay Rs. 97,800 with 6% interest per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit was decreed directing the defendant to pay an amount of Rs. 97,800 with interest. In default, the plaintiff can recover the amount from the defendant's assets.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The unchallenged proof affidavit and documents satisfactorily proved the plaint claim.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The unchallenged proof affidavit and documents satisfactorily proved the plaint claim.
Supporting Evidence
The unchallenged proof affidavit and documents would satisfactorily prove the plaint claim.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed directing the defendant to pay an amount of Rs. 97,800 with 6% interest per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sangeeth Kumar P.S
Party Age
31
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
18.06.20 Loan application submitted by the defendant, 18.06.20 Sanction Memorandum, 18.06.20 Agreement cum deed of Hypothecation, 18.06.20 Demand Promissory note, 18.06.20 Letter of undertaking, 26.07.22 Acknowledgment of debt and security, 12.01.23 Lawyer notice, 01.06.24 Loan Account statement
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Saira Phiroz
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Susan Kuriakose
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Brinta Varghese
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The defendant is directed to pay the outstanding loan amount with interest.
Evidence:
The suit is decreed directing the defendant to pay an amount of Rs.97,800/- (Rupees Ninty Seven thousand and Eight hundred only) with 6% interest per annum from the date of suit till the date of decree.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Loan Application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document was submitted by the defendant to apply for a Fund-based Working Capital Demand Loan.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Sanction Memorandum
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the sanctioning of the loan to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Agreement cum deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The defendant executed this document to secure the loan with a hypothecated vehicle.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Demand Promissory Note
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This note was executed by the defendant as a promise to repay the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Letter of undertaking
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The defendant agreed to the terms and conditions set forth in this letter for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Acknowledgment of Debt and Security
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document acknowledges the debt and security for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The notice was issued to the defendant demanding repayment of the arrears.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Loan Account Statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows the outstanding loan amount as of the date mentioned.
Reference:
Ext.A8

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between Canara Bank vs Sangeeth Kumar P.S regarding recovery of money
Case Code Year
Case between Canara Bank vs Sangeeth Kumar P.S regarding recovery of money

Quick Facts

Location
Ernakulam
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Ernakulam
Case Filed
Thu, 06/18/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Wed, 06/26/2024 - 12:00
From
Sat, 06/01/2024 - 12:00
To
Sun, 06/30/2024 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between M/s IDBI Bank vs Shri. Sajeeb V.S regarding realization of money
IN THE COURT OF THE THIRD ADDL. MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROLLER
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Bank of Baroda vs M/s M K S Agency, Sandhya Suresh regarding realization of money
Court of Munsiff, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Dhanalaxmi Bank Limited vs Thaslim Nazrin V M et al regarding realization of money
COURT OF MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Mrs. Preethymol P.T regarding realization of money
Court of the Third Addl. Munsiff & Rent Controller, Ernakulam
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Bank of Baroda represented by its Chief Manager, Manohar M vs Ratheesh P.S regarding recovery of money
COURT OF THE MUNSIFF, ERNAKULAM
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won