Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.770/2023

Case between Canara Bank vs D Packs regarding realisation of money.

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-07-28
Duration
approximately-7 years 10 months
Case Code No.
770
Case Closed
Mon, 07/28/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Canara Bank is the plaintiff seeking to recover a debt owed by D Packs, represented by its proprietor Ramakanthan P. The case involves the non-repayment of loans taken by the second defendant against which security documents were executed.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of Canara Bank for the recovery of ₹5,78,681.27 with interest. The case was decided ex parte due to the defendants' non-appearance.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of ₹5,78,681.27 with 6% interest from the date of the suit until the date of realization.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of Canara Bank for the recovery of ₹5,78,681.27 with interest. The case was decided ex parte due to the defendants' non-appearance.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence of the defendants' liability for the outstanding loan amounts.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence of the defendants' liability for the outstanding loan amounts.
Supporting Evidence
The oral and documentary evidence adduced by PW1 proves that an amount of 5,78,681.27/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Seventy-Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty-One and Paise Twenty-Seven Only) is due from the 2nd defendant.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result; the suit is decreed as follows: (a) The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of 5,78,681.27/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Seventy-Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty-One and Paise Twenty-Seven 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
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
D Packs
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ramakanthan.P
Party Age
53
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Original Loan Application form Pradhan Mantri Mudre Yojana dated 21/08/2018, Composite Hypothecation Agreements dated 18/09/2018 and 04/09/2019, Agreement-cum-Deed of Hypothecation dated 28/04/2020 and 04/06/2020, Acknowledgment of Debt and Security (NF 760) dated 03/09/2020, Statement of loan account.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Pradeep P.S
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Smt. Renu.G
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of ₹5,78,681.27 with interest.
Evidence:
In the result; the suit is decreed as follows: (a)The plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount of 5,78,681.27/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Seventy-Eight Thousand Six Hundred Eighty-One and Paise Twenty-Seven Only) with 6% interest from the date of the suit until the date of realization from the defendants and their assets.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is also entitled to recover the costs of this suit.
Evidence:
(a) The plaintiff is also entitled to recover the costs of this suit from the defendants and their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Original Loan Application form Pradhan Manthri Mudre Yojana
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was submitted by the 2nd defendant as part of the loan application process.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Original composite hypothecation agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This agreement outlines the terms under which the loan was secured.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Original composite hypothecation agreement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is another hypothecation agreement related to the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Agreement-cum-Deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document pertains to the additional amount sanctioned as a loan.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Agreement-cum-Deed of Hypothecation
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document represents another agreement involving the loan.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Acknowledgment of Debt and Security
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document is a formal acknowledgment of the debt by the 2nd defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Statement of Loan Account
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This statement provides the account details and outstanding balance due.
Reference:
Ext.A7

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
2023

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Tue, 09/18/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 07/28/2025 - 12:00
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

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