Arul Das vs Muthulakshmi — 586/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 14th July 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNDG010050222025
e-Filing Number
13-10-2025
Filing Number
2100/2025
Filing Date
24-Oct-2025
Registration No
586/2025
Registration Date
17-Nov-2025
Court
Principal District Court, Dindugul
Judge
2-Addl. District and Sessions Judge
Last updated 28-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Arul Das
Adv. N.T.R.Vijay Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.Muthulakshmi
Case History
-
14-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
25-Jun-2026
Copy of DepositionView PDF
Case 586/2025 Summary In this cheque bounce case filed under Section 10 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1873, petitioner Arul Das testified regarding a cheque issued by respondent Muthulakshmi on 29.08.2025 that was subsequently dishonored by the bank. The court admitted the petitioner's documentary evidence including the dishonored cheque and lawyer's notice demanding repayment. Cross-examination of the respondent was postponed by court order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Jun-2026
Trial
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
21-Apr-2026
Trial
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
08-Apr-2026
Issues
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
02-Apr-2026
Issues
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
23-Mar-2026
Written Statement
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
Written Statement
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Written Statement
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
19-Dec-2025
Issue of Service
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
28-Nov-2025
Issue of Service
Addl. District and Sessions Judge
-
17-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 586/2025
Case 586/2025 Summary In this cheque bounce case filed under Section 10 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1873, petitioner Arul Das testified regarding a cheque issued by respondent Muthulakshmi on 29.08.2025 that was subsequently dishonored by the bank. The court admitted the petitioner's documentary evidence including the dishonored cheque and lawyer's notice demanding repayment. Cross-examination of the respondent was postponed by court order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts