Al-Ain Court of First Instance rejected the case of a man who demanded to compel a woman to return the sum of 50,000 dirhams for a car he had bought from her, and she caught the price and refused to hand him over the car.
In the details, a man filed a lawsuit against a woman, demanding that she pay him 50 thousand dirhams or hand him over a car, in addition to obligating her to pay fees and expenses, on the grounds that the defendant sold a Mercedes car of the 2017 model and received the price and did not deliver the car.
The defendant submitted a reply memorandum in which she argued that the court had no jurisdiction locally to consider the case, and insisted that the plaintiff did not provide evidence of payment of the amount, explaining that the agreement was not completed, while the plaintiff submitted a commentary note in which he maintained that the defendant admitted before the Center for Conciliation and Reconciliation that she had received 50 thousand dirhams as a price. The car, when issuing the pledge of allegiance paper, demanded to address the Center for Conciliation and Reconciliation, and also insisted on looking at the cameras of a hospital in Abu Dhabi city to prove the fact that the defendant received the amount in cash inside the hospital.
The court heard the witness of the plaintiff, who testified after taking the legal oath that the defendant came and asked him to repair the vehicle. The plaintiff will pay the value of its repair, and the car has been parked in the workshop for six months, indicating that he was not present at the event of selling or buying the car.
The plaintiff requested that the decisive oath be directed to the defendant, and the defendant swore the decisive oath and denied all that was stated, while acknowledging that she had received the amount of 3,500 dirhams of the value of the vehicle.
The court stated in the merits of the ruling that it was established that the plaintiff relied on the conscience of the defendant and directed her the decisive oath, and it was established that the defendant swore the decisive oath not to be preoccupied with her obligation to the plaintiff with the price of the vehicle being claimed, and therefore the decisive oath would have settled the dispute in the issues that were focused on right.
She indicated that the defendant acknowledged to the plaintiff an amount of 3,500 dirhams of the value of the claim, and denied her preoccupation with the rest of the amount, and the dispute had been resolved by proving that the defendant was not preoccupied with this amount to the plaintiff, and the case is within the amount of 3,500 dirhams only, true and proven by the defendant’s admission, and the court ruled By obligating the defendant to pay the plaintiff an amount of 3,500 dirhams, and obligated the defendant to the appropriate expenses, and rejected the requests that exceeded that.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news