A young man asks his friend to return 96 thousand dirhams withdrawn from his bank card

"Abu Dhabi Appeal" upheld the ruling of the first instance and rejected the case.

archival

The Court of Appeal in Abu Dhabi upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance, which rejected a case accusing a young man of his friend using his bank card, withdrew more than 96,000 dirhams, and refused to pay the amount.

In the details, a young man filed a lawsuit against his friend, in which he demanded that he pay an amount of 96,730 dirhams, and compensation for the damages he sustained in the amount of 30,000 dirhams. He withdrew from it, which amounted to the claim amount within a month, and he did not take the initiative to return those amounts.

The Court of First Instance ruled to reject the case, noting that the plaintiff did not provide any evidence to prove the fact of the debt, so his claim became mere statements sent without a bond or evidence, especially since the messages on which the plaintiff relied on social media between him and the respondent did not prove the reality of the transaction between them, Nor is the fact of the debt or the advances proven, and there is no explicit acknowledgment of his indebtedness of the amount that is the subject of the lawsuit.

The plaintiff did not accept the judgment, and lodged his appeal, and demanded that his appeal be accepted in form, and in the matter, to cancel the appealed judgment and re-judgment of his requests before the first instance, and to authorize to address one of the telecommunications companies, to provide the court with conversations between him and his friend, while the respondent submitted a reply to his request, rejecting the appeal, and stuck to his defense The same, and that he had to use the appellant's card to disburse the amounts transferred to him by his brother at the appellant's account, given what was a circular as a result of one of the cases.

The Court of Appeal stated that what is proven from the litigation papers is that they are free from evidence, even a little, from which it is evident that the sums obtained by the appellant from the appellant’s account using his bank card, which he had previously handed to him with his consent and will, came as a result of his borrowing it, and then preoccupied with it, for example Indebtedness, given that the account statement and the respondent’s acknowledgment of obtaining those amounts, even if he does not foretell or be certain of the nature of their transaction or the latter’s indebtedness of those funds, and he insisted that he was not indebted to the matter that became his claim, and the case is also devoid of any evidence or presumption that rightly preoccupies the responsibility of the respondent In the amount that is the subject of the appeal, especially and did not substantiate what the sender said in the context of his newspaper regarding the appellant’s previous borrowing of his money by the same approach and his refund of what he obtained from his card withdrawals for months prior to the litigation period. expenses.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news