Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1518/2022

Case between Bank of Baroda vs Jobi George regarding realisation of money.

Court
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi. C
Order Date
2025-03-18
Duration
approximately-2 years 2 months
Case Code No.
1518
Case Closed
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Bank of Baroda seeking to recover a loan amount from Jobi George. Jobi George defaulted on a loan taken for purchasing a vehicle under a banking scheme.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the loan amount along with interest. The defendant was absent, leading to an ex parte decision.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹1,18,159.40/- from the defendant and his assets, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the loan amount along with interest. The defendant was absent, leading to an ex parte decision.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff was unchallenged as the defendant did not appear in court.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff was unchallenged as the defendant did not appear in court.
Supporting Evidence
Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to realise ₹1,18,159.40/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum with monthly rests from the date of suit till date of decree.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹1,18,159.40/- from the defendant and his assets.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Bank of Baroda
Relation
represented by its Chief Manager, Shan.M
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Jobi George
Party Age
30
Relation
S/o D.George
Plaintiffs Documents
Loan Application, Agreement of Hypothecation, General Undertaking, Letter of Acknowledgment of Debt, Demand Notice, Statement of Account.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Mini Girish
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹1,18,159.40/- from the defendant and his assets.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹1,18,159.40/- from the defendant and his assets.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 9% per annum with monthly rests from 01/08/2022 till the date of decree.
Evidence:
2. Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 9% per annum with monthly rests from 01/08/2022 till the date of decree.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realisation.
Evidence:
3. Plaintiff is allowed to realise future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realisation.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise the costs of the suit from the defendant and his assets.
Evidence:
4. Plaintiff is allowed to realise the costs of the suit from the defendant and his assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Loan Application
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document serves as the loan application submitted by the defendant to the plaintiff bank.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Agreement of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document outlines the terms of the hypothecation related to the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: General Undertaking
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document signifies the general undertaking by the defendant regarding the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Letter of acknowledgment of debt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This letter acknowledges the debt owed by the defendant as per the records.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Demand Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was issued to the defendant demanding repayment of the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This serves as proof of the postal communication sent to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Acknowledgment card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This card was used to confirm receipt of communications by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document details the transactions and outstanding balances in the defendant's account.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Certificate of Unapplied Interest
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This certificate indicates the interest amounts that were not applied to the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A9

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
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2022

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Sat, 12/31/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
100%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Canara Bank vs M/s M.R.K Agency regarding realization of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Federal Bank Ltd vs Rohil. V et al regarding Suit for realisation of money.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Shibu.V et al regarding realisation of money
THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Velamkanni Matha JLG Vizhinjam Unit et al regarding realization of money.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kerala Gramin Bank vs Ayodhya Kudumbasree et al regarding recovery of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won