Settlement provides for folding ladder’s return without admission it was a gift

Levan Kapanadze and Irakli Beridze settled their dispute over a folding ladder, agreeing that it would be returned to Levan. The agreement provides the return and separate transport-cost arrangement Levan sought in the matter listed before Kutaisi City Court, without a judicial determination of whether he had given the ladder away.

The disagreement centred on what Levan meant when he told Irakli to keep it. Levan maintained that he was allowing Irakli to store the ladder because he had no room; Irakli’s position was that the ladder had been given to him.

The settlement identifies the ladder by its folding design and the purchase receipt recording a price of 240 GEL. It sets a collection window rather than requiring delivery to Levan.

The recorded terms are:

• The folding ladder is to be returned.
• Collection is to take place at Irakli’s location on October 30 between 17:00 and 19:00.
• Each party bears his own transport costs.
• There is no admission that the ladder was gifted or that ownership transferred.

Levan’s account was that he bought the ladder and later lent it to Irakli for painting, not as a transfer of ownership. He asked that the conversation surrounding his instruction to keep it be considered, rather than treating those words alone as a gift.

The recorded phone thread supplies context for that position: Irakli asked whether he should bring the ladder back that night, Levan said he had no room, and Irakli agreed to wait until Levan needed it. The record also states that Levan told him there was no hurry to return it.

Irakli nevertheless maintained that Levan had given him the ladder. The settlement resolves possession without requiring either party to concede that disputed interpretation.

Levan bought the folding ladder in Kutaisi for 240 GEL. According to his account, he lent it to Irakli about three months later and requested its return roughly six weeks after the handover. Irakli refused.

The purchase receipt and phone conversation are identified as supporting material in the record. There is no separate record of the later return request, including the reported in-person request.

No judicial findings or confirmation of completed collection are recorded. The agreement supplies a practical route for returning the ladder while leaving the disputed meaning of the earlier exchange undecided.