Anish Mathew Thomas vs Ramesh Iron and Steel Company India P Ltd Advocate - M.S.Balajee Sridhar — 33/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER VII RULE 1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 29th April 2026.

Arguments Next hearing 29-Apr-2026 this date has passed

COS - Commercial Original Suit

CNR: TNCB220000762025

e-Filing Number

29-08-2025

Filing Number

98/2025

Filing Date

02-Sep-2025

Registration No

33/2025

Registration Date

02-Sep-2025

Court

Commercial Court in the Cadre of District Judge, Coimbatore

Judge

1-Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER VII RULE 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Anish Mathew Thomas

    Adv. C.Srivatsan

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ramesh Iron and Steel Company India P Ltd Advocate - M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  2. 2.M S R Iron Steel Industries India Pvt Ltd

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  3. 3.Balu Iron and Steel Company

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  4. 4.Balu Cement Corporation

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  5. 5.Sri Venkatramana Transports and logistics

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  6. 6.Prabhu Balasubramanian

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  7. 7.Kanakachalam Ganapathy

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

  8. 8.Karthik Balasubramanian

    Adv. M.S.Balajee Sridhar

Case History

  1. 29-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  5. 13-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

    Summary In this commercial case (COS No. 33 of 2025) before the Coimbatore Commercial Court, the court examined testimony regarding a consultant employment dispute involving outstanding payments. The court found that the plaintiff consultant was owed ₹25.75 lakh for services rendered and rejected the defendant company's counter-claims, holding them legally unsustainable. The court directed the defendant to pay the full outstanding amount to the plaintiff consultant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  9. 07-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  10. 02-Mar-2026

    Trial

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  11. 25-Feb-2026

    Trial

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  12. 17-Feb-2026

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  13. 04-Feb-2026

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  14. 23-Jan-2026

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  15. 05-Jan-2026

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  16. 10-Dec-2025

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  17. 26-Nov-2025

    Mediation

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  18. 20-Nov-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  19. 03-Nov-2025

    For further Proceedings

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  20. 27-Oct-2025

    Written Statement

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  21. 25-Oct-2025

    Written Statement

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  22. 22-Oct-2025

    Written Statement

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  23. 06-Oct-2025

    Written Statement

    Commercial Court In The Cadre Of District Judge

  24. 02-Sep-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  25. 02-Sep-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 33/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In this commercial case (COS No. 33 of 2025) before the Coimbatore Commercial Court, the court examined testimony regarding a consultant employment dispute involving outstanding payments. The court found that the plaintiff consultant was owed ₹25.75 lakh for services rendered and rejected the defendant company's counter-claims, holding them legally unsustainable. The court directed the defendant to pay the full outstanding amount to the plaintiff consultant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case