Grameena Vyavasaya Sahakari Sangh Ltd vs Sri Prakash Durgappa Naik , Major — 3440/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Status: ACCUSSED STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES

CNR: KAUK310045452025

ACCUSSED STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

Filing Number

681/2025

Filing Date

27-10-2025

Registration No

3440/2025

Registration Date

27-10-2025

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHATKALA

Judge

523-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT BHATKAL

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142

Petitioner(s)

Grameena Vyavasaya Sahakari Sangh Ltd

Adv. RAJESH IRAPPA NAIK

Respondent(s)

Sri Prakash Durgappa Naik , Major

Hearing History

Judge: 523-PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT BHATKAL

12-05-2026

ACCUSSED STATEMENT u/s 313 CrPC

28-04-2026

EVIDENCE

08-04-2026

EVIDENCE

23-03-2026

EVIDENCE

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

28-10-2025
Deposition
28-10-2025
Orders
12-05-2026
Deposition

Case 3440/2025 Summary Grameena Vyavasaya Sahakari Sangh Ltd v. Sri Prakash Durgappa Naik (Major) The court heard witness testimony on 12/05/2026 in this civil matter involving loan disputes. The petitioner's representative testified regarding an overdraft loan of ₹2,00,000 advanced to the respondent, with security deposits of ₹10,000 (shares) and ₹30,000 (FD), and claimed the respondent fully repaid the loan. Issues regarding check discrepancies, alleged false criminal case filing by the respondent, and document authentication were raised. The case was adjourned for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 3440/2025 Summary Grameena Vyavasaya Sahakari Sangh Ltd v. Sri Prakash Durgappa Naik (Major) The court heard witness testimony on 12/05/2026 in this civil matter involving loan disputes. The petitioner's representative testified regarding an overdraft loan of ₹2,00,000 advanced to the respondent, with security deposits of ₹10,000 (shares) and ₹30,000 (FD), and claimed the respondent fully repaid the loan. Issues regarding check discrepancies, alleged false criminal case filing by the respondent, and document authentication were raised. The case was adjourned for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BHATKALA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case