Case Summary
M/s PromoteN, a partnership firm, supplied steel rods to Abdul Vahab E, a building contractor. The plaintiff seeks to recover the value of the supplied materials due to a billing error and a shortage in the returned materials.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition for an arrest warrant, concluding that the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence to support their claims regarding the defendant's potential flight from justice.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to establish reasonable probability that the defendant intended to flee to avoid judgment.
The plaintiff failed to establish reasonable probability that the defendant intended to flee to avoid judgment.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to establish reasonable probability that the defendant intended to flee to avoid judgment.
The plaintiff failed to establish reasonable probability that the defendant intended to flee to avoid judgment.
Supporting Evidence
It cannot be inferred that the respondent is about to leave India so as to defeat the execution of any decree that may be passed against him.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- M/s PromoteN
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mahaesh
- Party Age
- 46
- Relation
- S/o D.V.Viswanath Prabhu
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Arjun P.J
- Party Age
- 26
- Relation
- S/o Jayadas P.P
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Abdul Vahab E
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of the Power of attorney executed by the plaintiff, Copy of the ledger of the plaintiff pertaining to the account of the defendant, Copy of the lawyer notice issued to the defendant, Postal receipt, Acknowledgment card
Defendants Documents
True copy of the test result issued by the Government Engineering College, Trivandrum, True copy of the undertaking issued by the plaintiff, True copy of the quotation, True copy of the undertaking issued by the plaintiff, True copy of the Invoice number JSSL24/21232131
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C.P.Peethambaran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Karthika Peethambaran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Arjun J Das
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M.A.Wahab
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- V.Bhuvanendran
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Subhash Syriac
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sunil Sadan P.S
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Mandatory Injunction
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioner sought an arrest warrant against the respondent.
Evidence:
The conditions enumerated under Rule 1 of Order 39 are not satisfied. Thus, the point is found against the petitioner.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of the Power of attorney executed by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Ledger Copy
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the ledger of the plaintiff pertaining to the account of the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of the lawyer notice issued to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt related to notices sent.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Acknowledgment card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment card related to notices sent.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Test Result
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of the test result issued by the Government Engineering College, Trivandrum.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Undertaking
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of the undertaking issued by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Quotation
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of the quotation.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Another Undertaking
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of the undertaking issued by the plaintiff.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Invoice
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of the Invoice number JSSL24/21232131.
Reference:
Ext.B5
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 M/s PromoteN vs Abdul Vahab E regarding supply of steel rods
Case Code Year
Case between M/s PromoteN vs Abdul Vahab E regarding supply of steel rods
Case Flags
Arrest Involved