Arabic lends his friend 480 thousand dirhams .. and the friend does not respond to calls

A person of Arab nationality helped his friend, materially, until the total lending him of him reached about 480 thousand dirhams, but he did not find an appropriate estimate from the borrower, as he prolonged the payment of the amount, which eventually forced him to resort to the Civil Court in Dubai, which ruled him and obligated the debtor to return the amount.

In detail, a person of Arab nationality filed a lawsuit before the Dubai courts, in which he demanded that the defendant be paid to pay the amount of 480 thousand dirhams, in addition to the legal interest 5% from the date of the judicial claim until the full payment, while obliging him to fees, fees and expenses.

He said in a statement of his claim that a friendship relationship has to the defendant, according to which he loaned him money at multiple periods in the context of his financial help, and the amounts accumulated on the stumbling friend until it reached 480 thousand dirhams, so he asked him to pay in light of his need for money, but he did not commit to that.

He added that the defendant acknowledged the debt in a text letter he sent to him from his phone via the “WhatsApp” application, and presented a plan to pay, provided that he pays an amount that exceeds the value of the debt in compensation for the delay, but the prosecutor asked him for the original amount only.

He continued that he gave the defendant what he needed from the time to pay, but he refrained from that, and stopped responding to his phone calls, so he decided to file the lawsuit.

He presented a document portfolio that included pictures of mutual talks between them through the application of “WhatsApp”, in which he acknowledged the debt, while the defendant did not appear before the court, and the settlement between them was not possible, so the court decided to reserve the lawsuit for the ruling.

In the reasons for her ruling, it stated that it is legally decided that extracting the seriousness of the prosecution in the debt is from the authority of the trial court, provided that its extraction is desirable with what has a support in the apparent papers.

She explained that it is not permissible for anyone, according to the Civil Transactions Law, to take the money of others without a legitimate reason. If he takes it, he must return it. And whoever seizes something unlawfully, he must return it to its owner with the gains or benefits that he earned, and the judge may compensate the right holder for what was limited to what the holding is in a pound.

And she added that it is also legally decided that the customary editor is considered to be issued by those who signed it and an argument against it, unless he explicitly denies what is attributed to him in terms of line, signature, seal, or fingerprint, or denies this behind him or denies his knowledge that the line, signature or fingerprint is for those who received the right.

On the issue of the lawsuit, the court indicated that it is fixed that the defendant borrowed from the plaintiff the amount claimed and did not return it. Whereas, the first did not attend, and he did not provide what is proven to fulfill his commitment, and he did not pay the lawsuit with any payment or defense, which is something that the court requires that the defendant be obligated to the plaintiff, in addition to a legal benefit 5% from the date of the claim until complete payment, and also obligated him to the expenses and fees of the case.

• The prosecutor loaned the owner of the sums of money at intervals out of material distress.