A V Thomas and Company limited vs Indian Steels — 301496/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: To record plea of the accused. Next hearing: 01st April 2026.
ST - SUMMARY TRIAL
CNR: KLER260019532024
Next Hearing
01st April 2026
Filing Number
301952/2024
Filing Date
20-07-2024
Registration No
301496/2024
Registration Date
20-07-2024
Court
Judicial First class Magistrate Court 1, Kochi
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
A V Thomas and Company limited
Adv. M Sajevan
Respondent(s)
Indian Steels
Bijulal Moni
Santhosh Kumar
Vinod Lal
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
To record plea of the accused
To record plea of the accused
To record plea of the accused
Call on
Oders in CMP
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-03-2026 | To record plea of the accused |
| 07-03-2026 | To record plea of the accused |
| 19-02-2026 | To record plea of the accused |
| 31-01-2026 | Call on |
| 30-01-2026 | Oders in CMP |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kochi allowed the application filed by accused persons Santhosh Kuma and Vinod Lal (partners of Indian Steels) in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court dispensed with their personal appearance in all proceedings, subject to the condition that they appear before the court as and when directed, since they are currently employed and residing abroad and had already authorized their counsel to represent them in all matters including recording pleas and examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kochi allowed the application filed by accused persons Santhosh Kuma and Vinod Lal (partners of Indian Steels) in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court dispensed with their personal appearance in all proceedings, subject to the condition that they appear before the court as and when directed, since they are currently employed and residing abroad and had already authorized their counsel to represent them in all matters including recording pleas and 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