He denied receiving the money and took the decisive oath

A girl accuses a young man of seizing 85 thousand dirhams with a marriage promise

The Abu Dhabi Court rejected the case and an “appeal” upheld the ruling.

archival

The Abu Dhabi Court of Appeal for Family and Civil and Administrative Claims has upheld a ruling of the Court of First Instance, which rejected a case brought by a girl against a young man who accused him of obtaining 85,000 dirhams from it with a false marriage promise. The Court of Appeal ruled to reject the case.

In detail, a girl filed a complaint against a young man who demanded that he pay her 85,000 dirhams, and address the competent authorities to unload the cameras of one of the centers to prove that she met the defendant, took a white envelope from her and questioned him about it, as well as instructing him to submit his bank statement through which he paid the amount in favor of an execution file before him. In precaution, he directed the complementary or decisive oath to her, noting that the young man borrowed the amount from her following his promise to marry her, and he refused to return it.

During the consideration of the case, the court directed the decisive oath to the defendant, and he swore it in the form of “I swear by God Almighty that I did not borrow from the plaintiff an amount of 85,000 dirhams, and she did not hand me this amount on loan, and that my responsibility is not occupied by the plaintiff with any amount in this regard, and God is a witness to what I say.” The Court of First Instance ruled to reject the case based on the defendant’s swearing of the decisive oath that his borrowing from the plaintiff from the plaintiff was invalid and not indebted to her, and with no need for any further examination of her precautionary requests to unload the cameras and addressing the bank account of the appellant because of their futility.

The girl did not accept the judgment and appealed it, and demanded that the appealed judgment be rescinded and that all of her requests be rescinded before the first instance. The bank for the day prior to meeting her and obtaining the amount he had paid in favor of the execution file before him.

The Court of Appeal stated in the merits of the judgment that it is decided that the judgment based on taking a decisive oath or on relinquishing an oath has the force of the res judicata, so it is not accepted to appeal against it in any way of appealing the judgments unless the appeal is based on the inadmissibility of taking the oath or Not related to the case, or invalidity in the procedures for directing or swearing it.

She pointed out that the appellant had previously relied on the conscience of her opponent, "the appellee", with the decisive oath she directed to him, and it was related to his person and focused on the amount claimed and the basis for the lawsuit.

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