Vidyarthadayini Sabha vs Chandran — 100727/2020

Case under Ia/1/2026 Classification : Application to Receive Documents Section Vidyarthadayini Sabha. Disposed: Contested--DECREED WITH COST on 12th March 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLTR190019272020

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

100727/2020

Filing Date

11-08-2020

Registration No

100727/2020

Registration Date

11-08-2020

Court

Munsiffcourt, Kodungallur

Judge

1-MUNSIFF KODUNGALLUR

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DECREED WITH COST

Acts & Sections

IA/1/2026 Classification : Application To Receive Documents Section Vidyarthadayini Sabha
IA/2/2026 Classification : Application To Receive Documents Section Vidyarthadayini Sabha

Petitioner(s)

Vidyarthadayini Sabha

Adv. K.G.Sajith

Respondent(s)

Chandran

Hearing History

Judge: 1-MUNSIFF KODUNGALLUR

12-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

Order/ Judgement

04-03-2026

Order/ Judgement

28-02-2026

Order/ Judgement

21-02-2026

Order/Judgement

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
Judgement

The Munsiff Court of Kodungallur partially decreed the plaintiff's suit for recovery of defaulted kuri (rotating savings scheme) installments. The court found the kuri agreement dated 7.7.2012 to be valid and genuine, rejecting the defendant's denial of signatures as mere assertion without substantive proof. The plaintiff was awarded Rs. 1,13,448 with 12% interest from suit date until decree, then 6% thereafter, but only for 34 installments falling within the three-year limitation period, and the claim for an equitable mortgage charge on defendant's property was rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

16-10-2024
Judgement
casestatus.in Summary

The Munsiff Court of Kodungallur partially decreed the plaintiff's suit for recovery of defaulted kuri (rotating savings scheme) installments. The court found the kuri agreement dated 7.7.2012 to be valid and genuine, rejecting the defendant's denial of signatures as mere assertion without substantive proof. The plaintiff was awarded Rs. 1,13,448 with 12% interest from suit date until decree, then 6% thereafter, but only for 34 installments falling within the three-year limitation period, and the claim for an equitable mortgage charge on defendant's property was rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Munsiffcourt, Kodungallur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case