St. Milagres credit Souharda Co op ltd. Karwar Branch Gokarna vs Bhagavan Pandurang Redkar, 37 yrs, Fish business, Tadadi, Kumta — 2248/2025
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Disposed: Contested--CONVICTED on 06th March 2026.
C.C. - CRIMINAL CASES
CNR: KAUK710019112025
Filing Number
237/2025
Filing Date
07-07-2025
Registration No
2248/2025
Registration Date
07-07-2025
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUMTA
Judge
633-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT,KUMTA
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--CONVICTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
St. Milagres credit Souharda Co op ltd. Karwar Branch Gokarna
Adv. Ranjan Ganapati Nayak
Respondent(s)
Bhagavan Pandurang Redkar, 37 yrs, Fish business, Tadadi, Kumta
Hearing History
Judge: 633-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT,KUMTA
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 21-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 17-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 04-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after finding the charges proved, and sentenced him to pay compensation of Rs. 1,32,619/- to the complainant and Rs. 3,000/- to the state, with six months simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. The court clarified that non-payment of compensation does not exempt the accused from liability even after serving imprisonment under Section 461 of the Civil Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
The court convicted the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after finding the charges proved, and sentenced him to pay compensation of Rs. 1,32,619/- to the complainant and Rs. 3,000/- to the state, with six months simple imprisonment if the fine remains unpaid. The court clarified that non-payment of compensation does not exempt the accused from liability even after serving imprisonment under Section 461 of the Civil Procedure Code. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts