State Bank of India R/by its chief Manager P.H. Krishna Kishor vs Kiran Negalur Advocate - DINESH H PATIL — 6/2023
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 Cpc Section 12. Disposed: Contested--DECREED on 28th April 2026.
Com.O.S. - Commercial Original Case
CNR: KADG010000632023
Filing Number
6/2023
Filing Date
05-01-2023
Registration No
6/2023
Registration Date
05-01-2023
Court
PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, DAVANGERE
Judge
243-PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DAVANGERE
Decision Date
28th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State Bank of India R/by its chief Manager P.H. Krishna Kishor
Adv. RAVIKUMAR V
Respondent(s)
Kiran Negalur Advocate - DINESH H PATIL
Hearing History
Judge: 243-PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE DAVANGERE
Disposed
JUDGMENTS CIVIL
EVIDENCE CIVIL
EVIDENCE CIVIL
EVIDENCE CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 27-04-2026 | JUDGMENTS CIVIL |
| 24-04-2026 | EVIDENCE CIVIL |
| 23-04-2026 | EVIDENCE CIVIL |
| 21-04-2026 | EVIDENCE CIVIL |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: State Bank of India v. Kiran Negalur Court Decision: The District and Sessions Judge, Davangere, decreed the suit in favor of State Bank of India (plaintiff) against defendant Kiran Negalur. Key Ruling: SBI was awarded ₹7,07,914 (principal outstanding amount) plus interest at 12.7% per annum compounded monthly from April 21, 2026 (cross-examination date) until realization. The court rejected the defendant's contentions that loan documents were signed on blank papers without consent and that interest rates were exorbitant, finding them unsupported by evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: State Bank of India v. Kiran Negalur Court Decision: The District and Sessions Judge, Davangere, decreed the suit in favor of State Bank of India (plaintiff) against defendant Kiran Negalur. Key Ruling: SBI was awarded ₹7,07,914 (principal outstanding amount) plus interest at 12.7% per annum compounded monthly from April 21, 2026 (cross-examination date) until realization. The court rejected the defendant's contentions that loan documents were signed on blank papers without consent and that interest rates were exorbitant, finding them unsupported by evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts