Signed judgment

## Findings 1. The Plaintiff, Samira Rahimi, claims that AFN 4,000 remains due from an agreed payment of AFN 8,000. The Defendant, Farid Rahimi, maintains that he delivered the full AFN 8,000 in an envelope. 2. The dispute turns on two electronic communications. On the day she received the envelope, the Plaintiff sent the Defendant a message stating, “Thank you.” The following morning, she sent a message stating that the AFN 4,000 had helped and asking when the remaining AFN 4,000 would be delivered. 3. In the absence of documentation of the cash handover, the parties’ contemporaneous conduct and communications are relevant to determining what occurred on the balance of probabilities. 4. The Defendant submits that the Plaintiff’s first message, “Thank you,” acknowledged receipt of the full AFN 8,000. I do not accept that interpretation. A prompt expression of thanks upon receiving an envelope may acknowledge receipt of the physical object and constitute ordinary courtesy. It does not, without more, establish that the contents were counted and verified. 5. The Plaintiff acknowledges that she did not raise the alleged shortage until the following morning. Although cash should preferably be counted in the payer’s presence, a delay of 12 to 18 hours is not, in itself, unreasonable or fatal to the claim. It is consistent with opening the envelope privately at a later time, discovering a discrepancy, and raising it when ordinary business hours resumed. 6. The Plaintiff’s second message identifies the amount she says she found—AFN 4,000—and requests the remaining AFN 4,000. Its specificity supports her account. On the evidence presented, the timing and content of that message are more consistent with her explanation than with an attempt to claim an additional sum fraudulently. 7. The Defendant chose to make the payment in cash in an envelope without obtaining a signed, itemised receipt at the time of delivery. By not securing a clear written acknowledgment of payment of AFN 8,000, he assumed the risk of evidentiary ambiguity. ## Reasons 8. The Plaintiff’s explanation is credible and consistent, and it outweighs the Defendant’s reliance on the ambiguous first message. A social expression of thanks, without more, does not establish that the debt was paid in full. ## Order 9. Judgment is entered for the Plaintiff. The Defendant is liable for the outstanding balance of AFN 4,000 and shall pay that sum to the Plaintiff within 14 days of this order. 10. Both parties are advised that future financial transactions exceeding AFN 1,000 should be made by bank transfer or accompanied by a signed and dated receipt stating the exact amount exchanged.