Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS. No.1443/2022

Case between Canara Bank vs Aju.S.K regarding realisation of money.

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Judge
Smt.Sreelakshmi.C
Order Date
2025-01-17
Duration
approximately-5 months
Case Closed
Fri, 01/17/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves Canara Bank seeking to recover a vehicle loan amount from Aju.S.K, who defaulted on repayment. The court found that the defendant failed to adhere to the loan agreement terms.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding loan amount from the defendant. The plaintiff was also granted interest and costs.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹4,37,285/- from the defendant and his assets, with interest at the rate of 11.35% per annum.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the outstanding loan amount from the defendant. The plaintiff was also granted interest and costs.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff bank provided unchallenged evidence of the outstanding loan amount due to the defendant's default.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff bank provided unchallenged evidence of the outstanding loan amount due to the defendant's default.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of the plaintiff is unchallenged because the defendant was set ex parte and PW1 was not cross-examined. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as claimed in the suit.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1.Plaintiff is allowed to realise ₹4,37,285/- from the defendant and his assets. 2.Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 11.35% per annum with monthly rests from 22/09/2022 till the date of decree. 3.Plaintiff is allowed to realise future interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realisation. 4.Plaintiff is allowed to realise the costs of the suit from the defendant and his assets.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Canara Bank, Muttada Branch, Thiruvananthapuram
Relation
represented by
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Aju.S.K
Party Age
30
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Loan Application dated 12/08/2014, Deed of Hypothecation dated 14/08/2014, Letter of undertaking dated 14/08/2014, Sanction Memorandum dated 14/08/2014, Acknowledgment of Debt dated 10/01/2020, Statement of Account, Advocate Notice dated 15/07/2022.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Reena.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise the outstanding loan amount of Rs.4,37,285/- from the defendant.
Evidence:
Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as claimed in the suit.
Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 11.35% per annum from the date of suit till realisation.
Evidence:
Plaintiff is allowed to realise interest at the rate of 11.35% per annum with monthly rests from the date of suit till realisation.
Relief Type: Damages
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:
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.
Evidence:
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:
The document was referred to as evidence that the defendant applied for a vehicle loan.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The deed outlines the terms under which the vehicle was hypothecated to secure the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Letter of undertaking
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This letter specifies the defendant's commitment to repay the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Sanction Memorandum
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document serves as proof of loan sanctioning by the bank.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Acknowledgment of Debt and Security
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This acknowledges the debt owed by the defendant regarding the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Statement of Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
It provides details of the outstanding balance on the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Copy of Advocate Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The notice was sent to the defendant regarding the demand for loan repayment.
Reference:
Ext.A7
Document Type: Postal receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The receipt confirms the mailing of the notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Acknowledgement Card
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This indicates that a notice sent to the defendant remained unserved.
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
Case between Canara Bank vs Aju.S.K regarding realisation of money.
Case Code Year
Case between Canara Bank vs Aju.S.K regarding realisation of money.

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 09/22/2022 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 01/17/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

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