Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.955/2021

Case between M/s Chakrabarti Eye Care Centre vs Gopinathan.B regarding recovery of money

Court
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-09-29
Duration
approximately-8 years 7 months
Case Code No.
955
Case Closed
Mon, 09/29/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

M/s Chakrabarti Eye Care Centre, represented by Dr. Arup Chakrabarti, is suing Gopinathan.B for the repayment of an advance rent amounting to ₹50,000. The plaintiff claims that the defendant failed to refund the advance after vacating the rented premises in 2019.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit filed by M/s Chakrabarti Eye Care Centre was dismissed by the court, finding that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence for its claims regarding the advance rent.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit filed by M/s Chakrabarti Eye Care Centre was dismissed by the court, finding that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence for its claims regarding the advance rent.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff did not provide credible evidence to support the claim for repayment of the advance amount.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff did not provide credible evidence to support the claim for repayment of the advance amount.
Supporting Evidence
Upon considering the evidence before this Court, it is found that the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree in its favour.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result: The suit is dismissed. No costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
M/s Chakrabarti Eye Care Centre
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Gopinathan.B
Party Age
54
Plaintiffs Documents
Acknowledgment receipt, Receipt
Defendants Documents
Rent Agreement

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. G. Anil Kumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. Thomas Skariah
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. K. Padmakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiff requested the return of the advance amount.
Evidence:
This court is of the view that the plaintiff is not entitled to get the relief as prayed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Acknowledgment Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Produced by the plaintiff to support the claim.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Introduced by the plaintiff but not clearly tied to the case.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Rent Agreement
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Essential for understanding the rental terms and obligations.
Reference:
Ext.B1

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2021

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque issued towards legally enforceable debt

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Fri, 02/17/2017 - 12:00
Case Closed
Mon, 09/29/2025 - 12:00
From
Mon, 09/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Tue, 09/30/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won