The South Indian Bank Ltd vs Paulson T V Advocate - JUSTEENA.M.P — 300144/2023

Case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 7. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 28th March 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLTR140005322023

Case disposed

Filing Number

300563/2023

Filing Date

02-03-2023

Registration No

300144/2023

Registration Date

02-03-2023

Court

Munsiff Court, Irinjalakuda

Judge

2-Additional Munsiff

Decision Date

28th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 7
Ia/1/2026 Classification : Application to Receive Documents Section The South Indian Bank Ltd

Petitioner(s)

The South Indian Bank Ltd

Adv. Fini P D

Respondent(s)

Paulson T V Advocate - JUSTEENA.M.P

Shereen Nazar

T O George,

Raji Poulose

Amrutha Paul

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Additional Munsiff

28-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Order/ Judgement

29-01-2026

Listed to

07-11-2025

Pre trial steps

15-09-2025

Pre trial steps

Final Orders / Judgements

28-03-2026
Judgement

Case Summary: OS No. 144/2023 South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Paulson T.V & Others The Munsiff's Court decreed the bank's money recovery suit against the defendants who defaulted on an educational loan of Rs. 2.5 lakh sanctioned in 2011. The court found the defendants liable for Rs. 3,01,488.17 plus 12% interest until decree and 6% thereafter, holding that the loan agreement, multiple debt acknowledgments, and demand notice substantiated the bank's claim. The defendants' absence at trial and failure to present contrary evidence resulted in ex parte judgment favoring the bank. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: OS No. 144/2023 South Indian Bank Ltd. v. Paulson T.V & Others The Munsiff's Court decreed the bank's money recovery suit against the defendants who defaulted on an educational loan of Rs. 2.5 lakh sanctioned in 2011. The court found the defendants liable for Rs. 3,01,488.17 plus 12% interest until decree and 6% thereafter, holding that the loan agreement, multiple debt acknowledgments, and demand notice substantiated the bank's claim. The defendants' absence at trial and failure to present contrary evidence resulted in ex parte judgment favoring the bank. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Munsiff Court, Irinjalakuda All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case