Case Summary
The plaintiffs, United Timber Corporation and its Managing Partner, Sri. Muhammed K. Naushad, are involved in a monetary dispute with the defendants, Nidhi Wood Industries and its proprietor, Sunaja Sarojini. The plaintiffs claim that the defendants owe them a significant outstanding amount due to dishonored cheques and failure to repay.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the suit, finding that the plaintiffs failed to prove their claims against the defendants. The judgment concluded that the defendants did not owe the outstanding amount alleged by the plaintiffs.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs failed to establish their claims and the authenticity of the documents presented.
The plaintiffs failed to establish their claims and the authenticity of the documents presented.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs failed to establish their claims and the authenticity of the documents presented.
The plaintiffs failed to establish their claims and the authenticity of the documents presented.
Supporting Evidence
The case advanced by the plaintiff itself is that the defendant had defaulted on payment of money, on multiple instances, and that even cheques issued by them had been dishonoured on multiple instances. Still, it is claimed by the Plaintiff that goods were given to the defendant on credit basis.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- United Timber Corporation
- Relation
- Rep. by its Managing Partner
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sri. Muhammed K Naushad
- Party Age
- 52
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nidhi Wood Industries
- Relation
- Rep. by its Proprietor
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sunaja Sarojini
- Party Age
- 48
- Relation
- Proprietor
Plaintiffs Documents
Photocopy of Deed of Partnership, Photocopy of acknowledgment of Registration of Firm, Photocopy of the lawyer notice, Reply notice, Credit bill issued by United Timber Corporation, Computer print out of Statement of Account, Computer print of Ledger Account details, Photocopy of balance sheet of plaintiff Firm.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Bibin Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- M. Sreekumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Ahad T
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Thoufeek Ahamed
- Appearance Type
- Assisting Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Rejected
Description:
Plaintiffs claimed a sum of 7,32,526/- with interest.
Evidence:
The plaintiff has failed to successfully establish that the defendants owe the amount to plaintiff, as alleged.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Photocopy of Deed of Partnership
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Photocopy of the acknowledgment of Registration of Firm
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Photocopy of the lawyer notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Reply Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Credit bill issued by United Timber Corporation
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Computer print out of Statement of Account
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type:
Computer print of Ledger Account details
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type:
Computer print of Ledger Account details
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type:
Photocopy of balance sheet of plaintiff Firm
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Marked subject to proof but not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.A9
Document Type:
Authorisation Letter
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked through witness but contents not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Document Type:
Certified copy of Statement of account with certificate u/s. 65 B of Indian Evidence Act
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Marked through witness but contents not established in court.
Reference:
Ext.X2
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff.
Reference:
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 United Timber Corporation, Sri. Muhammed K Naushad vs Nidhi Wood Industries, Sunaja Sarojini regarding realisation of money.
Case Code Year
Case between United Timber Corporation, Sri. Muhammed K Naushad vs Nidhi Wood Industries, Sunaja Sarojini regarding realisation of money.
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour