Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1945/2022

Case between Canara Bank et al vs M/s Prince Mobiles, Sajeena Beevi regarding realisation of money.

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-08-27
Duration
approximately-2 years 11 months 10 days
Case Code No.
1945
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Canara Bank is the plaintiff seeking to recover a loan amount from the defendants M/s Prince Mobiles and Sajeena Beevi. The defendants failed to repay the sanctioned loans, leading to the case.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the amount owed by the defendants along with interest. The defendants failed to appear and defend the case.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of ₹1,95,883/- with 6% interest and costs from the defendants.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, allowing them to recover the amount owed by the defendants along with interest. The defendants failed to appear and defend the case.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff clearly established the defendants' liability to repay the loans.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The evidence presented by the plaintiff clearly established the defendants' liability to repay the loans.
Supporting Evidence
The oral and documentary evidence adduced by PW1 proves that an amount of ₹1,95,883/- is due from the defendants. The documents produced by the plaintiff show that the defendants are liable to pay this amount.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result; the suit is decreed as follows: (a) The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of ₹1,95,883/- (Rupees One lakh Ninety-five Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty-Three only) with 6% interest from the date of the suit until the date of realization from the defendants and their assets.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank
Relation
represented by its Manager
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s Prince Mobiles
Party Age
30
Relation
represented by its Proprietor
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sajeena Beevi
Party Age
40
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original loan application form, Original Guarantee Agreement, Original Letter of undertaking, Original Pronote, Original Guarantee Covering Letter, Original application for Resolution under Resolution Framework, Original Debtor-Creditor agreement, True extract of Bank statements.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Prasanth.K
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding loan amount from the defendants.
Evidence:
The court found that the plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of ₹1,95,883/- (Rupees One lakh Ninety-five Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty-Three only) with 6% interest.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to recover the costs of this suit from the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original loan application form for Loans to Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs)
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the loan application form signed by the defendants, relevant for establishing the loan agreement.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Original Guarantee agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is the guarantee agreement signed by the defendants, detailing their responsibility for the loan repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Original letter of undertaking
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document shows the defendants' commitment regarding the loans.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Original Pronote
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a promissory note executed by the first defendant in favor of the plaintiff, confirming the debt.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Original Guarantee Covering Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a covering letter executed by the second defendant, supporting the guarantee for the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Original application for Resolution under Resolution Framework – 2.0
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document indicates additional financial assistance requested by the first defendant during the pandemic.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Original Debtor – Creditor agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document reflects an agreement for repayment of the additional loan granted to the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: True extract of Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides evidence of the transactions in the first loan account for the specified period.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: True extract of Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provides evidence of the transactions in the second loan account for the specified period.
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
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2022

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Fri, 09/16/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Bank

Similar Cases

Case between Kerala Gramin Bank (South Malabar Gramin Bank) vs Sadasivan P. regarding realisation of money.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between The Canara Bank vs Rajaneesh A.R regarding realization of money.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Indian Overseas Bank vs Sukumari.C regarding Suit for realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Canara Bank vs Jayakumar. R.V regarding realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between The Federal Bank Limited vs Benoy Francis regarding realization of money
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won