He claimed that she deluded him with profits greater than the capital
A young man accuses a girl of seizing 74 thousand dirhams
The Abu Dhabi Appeals Court upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance rejecting the young man's case.
archival
The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance, which rejected the case of a young man who accused a girl of defrauding him, and obtaining 74,000 dirhams, after she deluded him into the existence of a company in which he could invest his money, and which would generate more profits than what he deposited in it, and the court decided to accept Appeal in form, and rejection in substance.
In the details, a young man filed a lawsuit against a girl, in which he demanded a ruling obligating her to pay him 74,000 dirhams, indicating that the defendant deluded him into the existence of an investment company, which would generate profits for him twice the amount deposited in it, which called him to hand over the amount of the claim in two installments, through A friend's bank account, but he was surprised that there were no profits, and when asking her to return the amount, she procrastinated.
During the consideration of the case, the respondent attended in person, reviewed the wording of the oath directed to her, and stated that the agreement to invest the transfer amount was between her and another person, and there was no agreement to invest the amount between her and the appellant, and that the appellant had nothing to do with that, and the court considered amending the wording of the oath decisive, the appealed oath against her.
The court indicated that the appellant had sworn the oath in the new formula, and thus had resolved the issue of the case by denying the existence of an agreement between it and the appellant to invest the claimed funds, and therefore the appellant is not entitled to prove what he claims of funds owed by the respondent with any other evidence, given that the evidence And the decisive oath are two opposites that do not meet, and accordingly, the appeal presents itself without a valid document, which must be rejected, and the court decided to accept the appeal in form, and to reject it as a subject, in the manner indicated by the reasons, and obligated the appellant to expenses.
The victim said that he handed over the amount of the claim to the girl in two installments through a friend's bank account.
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news