Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd. Bhatkal. vs Subramanya s/o. Madev Naik — 2123/2025
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAUK310029412025
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
451/2025
Filing Date
28-07-2025
Registration No
2123/2025
Registration Date
28-07-2025
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHATKALA
Judge
523-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT BHATKAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd. Bhatkal.
Adv. Damodar H Naik
Respondent(s)
Subramanya s/o. Madev Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 523-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT BHATKAL
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-05-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 12-05-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 29-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 17-04-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 13-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC 2123/2025 Petitioner: Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd. Bhatkal Respondent: Subramanya s/o. Madev Naik Hearing Date: 15/12/2025 The case involves a loan dispute. The petitioner bank claims the respondent obtained a loan of Rs. 2,00,000 documented by a cheque, which was not honored. The bank alleges discrepancies in the cheque signature and claims the respondent has not repaid the full amount. The respondent denies receiving the loan authorization and disputes the bank's claims. The court heard witness testimony from the bank representative regarding loan documentation and repayment status. The case was adjourned for further inquiry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC 2123/2025 Petitioner: Vyavasaya Seva Sahakari Sangha Ltd. Bhatkal Respondent: Subramanya s/o. Madev Naik Hearing Date: 15/12/2025 The case involves a loan dispute. The petitioner bank claims the respondent obtained a loan of Rs. 2,00,000 documented by a cheque, which was not honored. The bank alleges discrepancies in the cheque signature and claims the respondent has not repaid the full amount. The respondent denies receiving the loan authorization and disputes the bank's claims. The court heard witness testimony from the bank representative regarding loan documentation and repayment status. The case was adjourned for further inquiry. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts