Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Karthika S and Libu Narayanan, sought to recover a security deposit of ₹4,50,000 from the defendants, B. Saji Kumar and Mrs. Viji Saji Kumar, due to issues regarding a lease agreement for a godown. The case centers around the defendants' failure to return the deposit after the plaintiffs vacated the premises.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiffs for the recovery of the security deposit. The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not properly terminate the lease agreement, which was a critical factor in the case.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate proper termination of the lease agreement and lacked sufficient proof of their claims.
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate proper termination of the lease agreement and lacked sufficient proof of their claims.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate proper termination of the lease agreement and lacked sufficient proof of their claims.
The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate proper termination of the lease agreement and lacked sufficient proof of their claims.
Supporting Evidence
The specific case that is laid out by the defendants is that the rent had not been properly paid. The defendants have no case that the advance/security deposit had not been paid by the plaintiff. But the plaintiff has not made out a case that entitles them to receive back the advance amount.
Judgment Evidence:
The suit is therefore dismissed. The parties shall suffer their respective costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Karthika S
- Party Age
- 32
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Libu Narayanan
- Party Age
- 39
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- B. Saji Kumar
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mrs. Viji Saji Kumar
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Colour Photocopy of the Lease Agreement, Computer generated bank statement, Legal Notice, Reply Notice, Acknowledgment receipt of Petition issued by City Police Office
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Leela R
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sreelakshmi M
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Boby K Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Haritha Nair Harikumar
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Vrinda G
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Shravan V. S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Veena L
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Kavya Prakash
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Karishma M. R
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The plaintiffs sought to recover a sum of ₹4,50,000 along with interest from the defendants.
Evidence:
The court found that the reliefs as sought for by the plaintiff cannot be granted in the absence of proof of a proper termination of the lease agreement and any proper proof regarding the contents of the lease agreement.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Lease Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document outlines the terms and conditions for the lease of the godown, which is central to the plaintiffs' claims.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Bank statement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was intended to prove the payment of rent by the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as a formal request for the return of the security deposit.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Reply Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the response from the defendants to the legal notice issued by the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides proof of the plaintiffs' petition filed with the police.
Reference:
Ext.A5
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 Karthika S vs B. Saji Kumar et al regarding Money Recovery
Case Code Year
Case between Karthika S vs B. Saji Kumar et al regarding Money Recovery