R Vishwanatha S/o Ramanna vs Siddeshi P S/o Nunkappa — 1391/2022
Case under Sec. 138 of N.i. Act. Status: EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KADG620027552022
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
1391/2022
Filing Date
09-11-2022
Registration No
1391/2022
Registration Date
09-11-2022
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, JAGALUR
Judge
256-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAGALUR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
R Vishwanatha S/o Ramanna
Adv. B. SHARANAPPA
Respondent(s)
Siddeshi P S/o Nunkappa
Hearing History
Judge: 256-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAGALUR
EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL
ARGUMENTS- CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL
EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL |
| 09-04-2026 | EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL |
| 04-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS- CRIMINAL |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL |
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE -CRIMINAL |
Interim Orders
Summary of Case 1391/2022 This civil case before the First Class Judicial Magistrate Court, Jagalur, involved a dispute concerning a check and signature verification. The petitioner's witness (a bank manager) testified that specimen signatures and account opening documents were verified against originals. The respondent's counsel cross-examined, highlighting discrepancies: the check bore the signature "P Siddeshi" in English while specimen documents showed "S.Siddeshprem," and the check was returned for insufficient funds before any signature verification was conducted. The court recorded the testimony and noted contradictions between the check signature and specimen signatures in filed documents. The case was adjourned with no further cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Case 1391/2022 This civil case before the First Class Judicial Magistrate Court, Jagalur, involved a dispute concerning a check and signature verification. The petitioner's witness (a bank manager) testified that specimen signatures and account opening documents were verified against originals. The respondent's counsel cross-examined, highlighting discrepancies: the check bore the signature "P Siddeshi" in English while specimen documents showed "S.Siddeshprem," and the check was returned for insufficient funds before any signature verification was conducted. The court recorded the testimony and noted contradictions between the check signature and specimen signatures in filed documents. The case was adjourned with no further cross-examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts