Case Summary
Vineesh.K.K, the plaintiff, constructed a house for the first defendant, Asha Vinod Kumar, and is seeking to recover Rs.2,50,000 due to non-payment. The defendants counter that the plaintiff delayed the construction and overcharged.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Counter claim granted for Rs.5,00,000 with interest
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for Rs.2,50,000 but decreed the counter claim allowing Rs.5,00,000 with interest.
Key Reasoning:
The plaintiff failed to prove the claims made regarding the construction and amounts due.
The plaintiff failed to prove the claims made regarding the construction and amounts due.
Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiff failed to prove the claims made regarding the construction and amounts due.
The plaintiff failed to prove the claims made regarding the construction and amounts due.
Supporting Evidence
The court is unable to reach a conclusion as to what is the amount that the plaintiff is claiming from the defendant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is dismissed and the counter claim is decreed with cost directing the counterclaim defendant to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the counterclaim plaintiff with interest at the rate of 9 per cent from the date of suit till date of decree.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vineesh.K.K
- Party Age
- 33
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Asha Vinod Kumar
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Dr.C.V.Ravi
Plaintiffs Documents
Agreement dated 20.09.2013, Copy of Account Statement
Defendants Documents
Retail Invoices, Tax invoices
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.M.Shanavas
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.K.P. Ashok Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- A.Balakrishnan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
Plaintiff sought realization of Rs. 2,50,000 from the defendants.
Evidence:
Hence, the plaintiff is not entitled to a decree as sought for.
Relief Type:
Recovery
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The counter claim by Defendant No 1 for Rs. 5,00,000 was granted.
Evidence:
The counter claim is to be decreed to that extent with costs.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The agreement executed on 20/09/2013 outlines the terms for construction and payment.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Account Statement
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document pertains to the amount paid by the defendants to the plaintiff for the construction.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Retail Invoice
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Invoices presented as evidence for payments made by the defendants.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
The report by the Advocate Commissioner detailing the status of construction referenced throughout the judgment.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Valuation Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
This valuation report assesses the extent of construction completed.
Reference:
Ext.C1(a)
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Follow-up report on the construction status after initial inspection.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Final report assessing the completion of construction.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type:
Valuation Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Continuous evaluation of the construction cost and completed works.
Reference:
Ext.C3(a)
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Money and Loan Recovery
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Non-payment of rent
Case Code
Case between Vineesh.K.K vs Asha Vinod Kumar et al regarding realisation of money
Case Code Year
Case between Vineesh.K.K vs Asha Vinod Kumar et al regarding realisation of money