P.Munirathinam vs M.Kumar — 365/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section Or7,Rul1-6. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKI010032332022
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
709/2022
Filing Date
02-09-2022
Registration No
365/2022
Registration Date
03-09-2022
Court
Principal District Court, Krishnagiri
Judge
1-Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
P.Munirathinam
Adv. P.YASVANTH
Respondent(s)
M.Kumar
K.Bhuvaneshwari
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 09-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 27-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: O.S. No. 365/2022 Court Order dated 25.02.2026 This document records the cross-examination of PW.1 (P. Munirathinam) in a civil suit involving loan disputes. The witness testified regarding multiple promissory notes (dated 2016-2019) totaling approximately ₹20,00,000, relating to loans allegedly borrowed from respondents M. Kumar and K. Bhuvaneshwari. Key disputes included: whether loans were for IVF treatment (₹3,00,000 in 2016) or general purposes; the authenticity of promissory notes and respondents' signatures; and whether interest payments were made. The witness admitted inconsistencies between his affidavit and testimony, and the court adjourned cross-examination to continue at a later date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: O.S. No. 365/2022 Court Order dated 25.02.2026 This document records the cross-examination of PW.1 (P. Munirathinam) in a civil suit involving loan disputes. The witness testified regarding multiple promissory notes (dated 2016-2019) totaling approximately ₹20,00,000, relating to loans allegedly borrowed from respondents M. Kumar and K. Bhuvaneshwari. Key disputes included: whether loans were for IVF treatment (₹3,00,000 in 2016) or general purposes; the authenticity of promissory notes and respondents' signatures; and whether interest payments were made. The witness admitted inconsistencies between his affidavit and testimony, and the court adjourned cross-examination to continue at a later date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts