V. UdayaKumar vs S. Lamathi — 42/2024

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 200. Status: Judgement. Next hearing: 11th June 2026 Date Not Updated.

Judgement Next hearing 11-Jun-2026 this date has passed

STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case

CNR: TNCG100007562024

Filing Number

683/2024

Filing Date

28-Feb-2024

Registration No

42/2024

Registration Date

28-Feb-2024

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallavaram

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 200

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.V. UdayaKumar

    Adv. M. Saravanan

  2. 2.R. Raju

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.S. Lamathi

Case History

  1. 11-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Jun-2026

    Judgement

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  3. 29-May-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  4. 19-May-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  5. 11-May-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  6. 05-May-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  7. 30-Apr-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  8. 15-Apr-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  9. 08-Apr-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  10. 02-Apr-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  11. 16-Mar-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  12. 07-Mar-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  13. 20-Feb-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  14. 12-Feb-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  15. 05-Feb-2026

    Cmp Pending

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  16. 30-Jan-2026

    Judgement

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  17. 27-Jan-2026

    Judgement

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  18. 19-Jan-2026

    Judgement

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  19. 30-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  20. 17-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  21. 06-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  22. 18-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  23. 12-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  24. 03-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  25. 25-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  26. 08-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  27. 19-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  28. 28-Aug-2025

    Questioning

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  29. 07-Aug-2025

    Questioning

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  30. 16-Jul-2025

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    This document is a witness deposition, not a case judgment or order. It records testimony given on 16.07.2025 by a witness (Raji, son of Ramasamy) in STC Case 42/2024 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram. The witness, who worked as an assistant to petitioner V. Udayakumar for 20 years, testified about a ₹30 lakh loan given to respondent S. Lamathi in November 2014 and subsequent partial repayments of ₹9 lakh. No case outcome (bail, dismissal, adjournment) is determined in this document—it is purely evidentiary testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  31. 16-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  32. 26-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  33. 19-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  34. 05-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  35. 12-May-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  36. 17-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  37. 24-Mar-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  38. 27-Feb-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  39. 27-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  40. 12-Feb-2025

    Trial

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  41. 10-Jan-2025

    Trial

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  42. 04-Dec-2024

    Issue of Process

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  43. 12-Nov-2024

    Issue of Process

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  44. 25-Sep-2024

    Issue of Process

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  45. 09-Aug-2024

    Issue of Process

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  46. 06-Jun-2024

    Issue of Process

    District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram

  47. 12-Apr-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  48. 28-Feb-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 42/2024

casestatus.in Summary

This document is a witness deposition, not a case judgment or order. It records testimony given on 16.07.2025 by a witness (Raji, son of Ramasamy) in STC Case 42/2024 before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Pallavaram. The witness, who worked as an assistant to petitioner V. Udayakumar for 20 years, testified about a ₹30 lakh loan given to respondent S. Lamathi in November 2014 and subsequent partial repayments of ₹9 lakh. No case outcome (bail, dismissal, adjournment) is determined in this document—it is purely evidentiary testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case