Kar. Vikas Grameena Bank (Before amalgamation Varada Grameena Bank), Branch office at Mundgod. vs Sri. Vijayan Nayar S/o. Krishnapilai,major,Occ. Vinay Engineering works — 36/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O.VII,R.1,R/w26. Disposed: Uncontested--PARTLY DECREED on 02nd May 2026.

Case disposed

Com.O.S. - COMMERCIAL ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KAUK010015572025

Filing Number

36/2025

Filing Date

05-Nov-2025

Registration No

36/2025

Registration Date

05-Nov-2025

Court

PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KARWAR

Judge

519-Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

Decision Date

02-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--PARTLY DECREED

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O.VII,R.1,R/w26

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kar. Vikas Grameena Bank (Before amalgamation Varada Grameena Bank), Branch office at Mundgod.

    Adv. PARAMESHWAR SHRIKRISHNA BHAT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sri. Vijayan Nayar S/o. Krishnapilai,major,Occ. Vinay Engineering works

  2. 2.Shri. Kumar S/o.Sankrappa Lamani,major, business,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-May-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

  3. 02-May-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary: Com.O.S.No.10/2025 Court Decision: The suit was partly decreed in favor of Canara Bank (plaintiff). The defendant, Smt. Susama, must repay Rs.7,67,535.28 with interest at 9% per annum from 01-02-2025 until realization—reduced from the bank's claimed 11.15% rate, which the court deemed exorbitant. Key Reasoning: The court found the defendant availed an overdraft loan of Rs.7,00,000 on 17-03-2022, evidenced by her signatures on loan documents (application, sanction letter, cash credit agreement, and promissory note). The defendant's failure to cross-examine the bank's sole witness left the bank's evidence unchallenged and unrebutted, strengthening the plaintiff's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 02-May-2026

    Disposed

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  5. 16-Apr-2026

    DepositionView PDF

  6. 16-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  7. 02-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  8. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  9. 13-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  10. 20-Jan-2026

    Summons

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  11. 24-Nov-2025

    Summons

    Prl. District Sessions Judge, Court U.k, Karwar

  12. 06-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 05-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 36/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Com.O.S.No.10/2025 Court Decision: The suit was partly decreed in favor of Canara Bank (plaintiff). The defendant, Smt. Susama, must repay Rs.7,67,535.28 with interest at 9% per annum from 01-02-2025 until realization—reduced from the bank's claimed 11.15% rate, which the court deemed exorbitant. Key Reasoning: The court found the defendant availed an overdraft loan of Rs.7,00,000 on 17-03-2022, evidenced by her signatures on loan documents (application, sanction letter, cash credit agreement, and promissory note). The defendant's failure to cross-examine the bank's sole witness left the bank's evidence unchallenged and unrebutted, strengthening the plaintiff's case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case