Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No.136/2018

Case between Mr.Viayakumar.C.P vs M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd et al regarding employment termination and salary arrears.

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Sri. Vivek P.
Order Date
2025-03-29
Duration
approximately-7 years 10 months 24 days
Case Closed
Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Mr.Viayakumar.C.P, alleges wrongful termination by his employer, M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd, and claims unpaid salary arrears amounting to Rs. 8,23,565. The defendants have denied the claims in their written statement.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to pay him Rs. 8,23,565 along with interest. The court ruled that the termination was invalid and the plaintiff was entitled to his unpaid salary.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Rs. 8,23,565/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this suit till its realization.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to pay him Rs. 8,23,565 along with interest. The court ruled that the termination was invalid and the plaintiff was entitled to his unpaid salary.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court found that the defendants did not give the required notice for termination and failed to prove that the plaintiff was still on probation.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court found that the defendants did not give the required notice for termination and failed to prove that the plaintiff was still on probation.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of the plaintiff stands unchallenged and unrebutted. Nothing is forthcoming from the defendants to show that they had given one month's salary in lieu of notice to PW1.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. That the 1st defendant shall pay Rs. 8,23,565/- to the plaintiff with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this suit till its realisation.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Mr.Viayakumar.C.P
Party Age
58
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd
Relation
By Chairman and Managing Director
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd
Relation
By Chairman and Managing Director
Plaintiffs Documents
Appointment order issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P, Copy of letter issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P, Copy of claim letter issued by Vijayakumar.C.P to Shamel necleus with statement, Copy of claim letter issued by Vijayakumar.C.P to District Labour Officer, Kozhikode, Letter issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.K.P.Gangadharan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Nithin Sathyendran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to recover Rs. 8,23,565 from the defendants.
Evidence:
Hence I find that the plaintiff is entitled for a decree as prayed for.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants shall pay the costs of the suit.
Evidence:
The defendants shall pay the costs of the suit.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Appointment Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original appointment order issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of letter issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Claim Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of claim letter issued by Vijayakumar.C.P to Shamel necleus with statement.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Claim Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of claim letter issued by Vijayakumar C.P to District Labour Officer, Kozhikode.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Letter issued by Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd to Vijayakumar.C.P.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Registration Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of Registration certificate issued by Asst.R.A., Ernakulam in the name of Nucleus Premium Properties Pvt.Ltd.
Reference:
Ext.A6

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Mr.Viayakumar.C.P vs M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd et al regarding employment termination and salary arrears.
Case Code Year
Case between Mr.Viayakumar.C.P vs M/s.Nucleus Premium Properties (Pvt.) Ltd et al regarding employment termination and salary arrears.

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Thu, 03/29/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
95%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Canara Bank vs M/S U.B. Hardwares regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Panakkal Mammedkoya vs Fabir et al regarding partition
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Kalarikandy Subash Babu (died), Durga Devi, Bindya, Sandya vs Kasthuri Bai, Ramani Bai regarding partition of property.
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Moideen.V.P vs Pathumma et al regarding setting aside a final decree
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Civil Suit Defendant Won