Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.1212/2018

Case between Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Science and Technology vs Dr. Jayasree. S. Kumar et al regarding Suit for realisation of money

Court
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Judge
Sri. Mithun Gopi.G.S
Order Date
2025-03-29
Duration
approximately-8 years 6 months
Case Code No.
1212
Case Closed
Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Science and Technology, sought recovery of an amount of ₹1,50,000/- from the defendants, who consist of Dr. Jayasree. S. Kumar and her daughter Amrithasree. The court found that the plaintiff had mistakenly overpaid the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, awarding the recovery of ₹1,50,000/- with interest due to overpayment issues. The defendants were ordered to pay the costs of the suit as well.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
₹1,50,000/- with 6% interest from the date of the suit and costs of the suit
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed in favor of the plaintiff, awarding the recovery of ₹1,50,000/- with interest due to overpayment issues. The defendants were ordered to pay the costs of the suit as well.
Why Plaintiff Won:
Plaintiff proved that the defendants received a payment by mistake and were liable to refund it.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
PW1 deposed that the payment of ₹1,50,000/- by cheque No. 183792 dated 16.11.2016 was made due to a mistake, as the cash payment of ₹1,50,000/- made on 03.11.2016 was overlooked. This was an unintentional error and there was no negligence involved.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result; the suit is decreed as follows: -(a)The plaintiff is entitled to realise an amount of 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) with 6% interest from the date of the suit, till date of realisation from the defendants and their assets.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Science and Technology
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Dr. Jayasree. S. Kumar
Party Age
58
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Amrithasree
Party Age
35
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
KBF sanction order No. KBF - TVM/F4/20148/2016, True copy of bank receipt, True copy of cash receipt No. 4580, Copy of IP Bill No. 8026, True copy of bank payment voucher No. 4207, True copy of bank payment voucher No.4229
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. P. Balakrishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. K.P. Krishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff sought to recover ₹1,50,000/- with interest from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is entitled to realise an amount of 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) ₹ with 6% interest from the date of the suit, till date of realisation from the defendants and their assets.
Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is also entitled to recover costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
The plaintiff is also entitled to realise the costs of this suit from the defendants and their assets.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: KBF Sanction Order
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was presented to show the sanction for an advance payment of ₹2,00,000/- made by the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Bank Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This was marked to evidence the payment of ₹2,00,000/- by cheque from the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Cash Receipt
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the cash payment of ₹1,50,000/- made by the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Inpatient Bill
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This bill shows the total expenditure incurred for the treatment of the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Bank Payment Voucher
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was used to evidence the payment made to the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Bank Payment Voucher
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was also used to evidence the payment made to the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was issued to demand the amount due from the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.A10
Document Type: Confirmation letter from SBI bank
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document confirms the payment made to the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A11
Document Type: Authorization letter
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This letter authorized the PW1 to represent the plaintiff in the case.
Reference:
Ext.A12
Document Type: Account Statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This statement was marked to show the payments made to the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A13
Document Type: Bank statement
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This statement provides details on the payments related to the 1st defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A14
Document Type: Admission Record
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This record indicates the admission of the 1st defendant to the hospital.
Reference:
Ext.A15

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
2018

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque dishonour

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Mon, 01/01/2018 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 03/29/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Government

Similar Cases

Case between Principal Agricultural Officer vs R.K.Sasiharan regarding recovery of money
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Cindrella Darthalis vs The State of Kerala et al regarding Suit for realisation of money.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between S.R. Amritha vs State of Kerala, The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Vilapil Grama Panchayath regarding suit dismissing for default.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Noorjahan vs Kerala State Electricity Board et al regarding default dismissal of suit.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between S.Sreejith.IPS vs K.M.Shajahan regarding damages
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won