Case Summary
Kuttukaran Trading Ventures and Popular Automobiles are plaintiffs seeking payment from Shajil for outstanding debts related to automobile accessories. The plaintiffs allege that Shajil failed to pay the agreed amounts despite multiple reminders and legal notices.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit filed by Kuttukaran Trading Ventures and Popular Automobiles against Shajil, stating that the claims were barred by the law of limitation.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish their claims adequately and that the suit was barred by limitation.
The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish their claims adequately and that the suit was barred by limitation.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish their claims adequately and that the suit was barred by limitation.
The court found that the plaintiffs did not establish their claims adequately and that the suit was barred by limitation.
Supporting Evidence
However, this court is of the view that the claim is barred by limitation. The plaintiffs have no right to realize any amount from the defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Kuttukaran Trading Ventures
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- M/S.PopularAutomobiles
- Relation
- represented by
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Shajil
- Party Age
- 45
Plaintiffs Documents
Legal notice dated 01/07/2015, Settlement of purchase outstanding document, Demand Notice dated 22/05/2017.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Smt. K .G. Rita
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V .K. ISSAC
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought to recover an amount of Rs.5,38,204 from the defendant.
Evidence:
The court found the claim barred by limitation and dismissed the suit, thus refusing the relief.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court referred to this document as evidence of the plaintiff's attempts to demand payment from the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Credit Invoice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court used this document to establish the amounts owed by the defendant during the period of credit transactions.
Reference:
Ext.A3(series)
Document Type:
Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referred to in relation to the outstanding balances owed by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Demand Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The court noted this as part of the plaintiffs' efforts to demand payment of the owed amount.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was referenced to establish the legal standing of the plaintiffs.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Partnership Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to confirm the formation and legitimacy of the plaintiff firms.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Recovery of money
Case Code
Case between Kuttukaran Trading Ventures vs Shajil regarding realization of money and other reliefs
Case Code Year
Case between Kuttukaran Trading Ventures vs Shajil regarding realization of money and other reliefs