Parbattie v. Rooplall, 2016 ONSC 5740
CITATION: Parbattie v. Rooplall, 2016 ONSC 5740
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 485/15 DATE: 20160913
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
Gowri Parbattie
Plaintiff (Appellant)
– and –
Steve Rooplall, O/A All Canada Refrigera, AKA Canada Refrigera, AKA All Major Appliance; Sandra Rooplall, O/A All Canada Refrigera, AKA All Canada Refrigera
Defendant (Respondent)
Gowri Parbattie, self-represented
Sandra Rooplall, self-represented
HEARD at Toronto: September 13, 2016
DAMBROT J. (Orally)
[1] This is an appeal from the judgment of Deputy Judge Clemenhagen dismissing a claim against the defendant.
[2] The plaintiff made a loan of $10,000.00 by way of a cheque payable to Steve Rooplall. The loan was never repaid.
[3] The plaintiff obtained a judgment against Steve Rooplall, but claimed at trial that Sandra Rooplall was jointly liable with him. The plaintiff said that the loan was a business loan to both parties. The defendant denied this.
[4] After hearing their evidence, the trail judge ruled:
Unless I see a written document, which is exceedingly thin in this case, relating to this loan, indicating it was a loan for the business of Sandra Rooplall, or in fact a joint loan, I am going to go with the facts, which would indicate that the draft was only to Steve Rooplall, that the payment was only to him and that he only – only he endorsed it. He got the money. What he did with it had nothing to do with his ex-wife at that point in time.
[5] At the end of his judgment, he concluded:
Therefore I have no choice but to go along with all of the written documentation, which would indicate that this loan was only to the defendant, Steven Rooplall.
Therefore the judgment which is in effect against him remains and the action as against Sandra is dismissed.
[6] The plaintiff is very sincere and indeed is most persuasive. In effect however, she is asking me to retry this case and substitute different findings of fact for those made by the trial judge.
[7] Although I am most sympathetic to the plaintiff who has clearly been wronged at least by the male defendant, it is not opened to me to do what she asks absent some showing of an error on the part of the trial judge. I see none. As a result this appeal must be dismissed.
[8] In all of the circumstances, I do not think that the Deputy Judge was justified in awarding costs against the plaintiff in the amount of $1,500.00 and I reduce those costs to $500.00.
[9] I award no costs in this appeal.
COSTS
[10] I have endorsed the Appeal Book and Compendium as follows: “Appeal dismissed for oral reasons delivered in Court. Costs before the trial judge reduced to $500.00. No costs of this appeal.”
___________________________ DAMBROT J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: September 13, 2016
Date of Release: September 19, 2016
CITATION: Parbattie v. Rooplall, 2016 ONSC 5740
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 485/15 DATE: 20160913
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
Gowri Parbattie
Plaintiff (Appellant)
– and –
Steve Rooplall, O/A All Canada Refrigera, AKA Canada Refrigera, AKA All Major Appliance; Sandra Rooplall, O/A All Canada Refrigera, AKA All Canada Refrigera
Defendant (Respondent)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DAMBROT J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: September 13, 2016
Date of Release: September 19, 2016