CANARA BANK, REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KARUR vs K.SAMSON AND ANOTHER — 4/2026

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section O7R1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed with cost on 01st April 2026.

COS - Commercial Original Suit

CNR: TNKR010011502023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

416/2023

Filing Date

11-04-2023

Registration No

4/2026

Registration Date

13-04-2023

Court

Principal District Court, Karur

Judge

1-District Judge

Decision Date

01st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Decreed with cost

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section O7R1
IA/2/2025 Classification : Injunction Petition Section CANARA BANK, REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KARUR

Petitioner(s)

CANARA BANK, REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, KARUR

Adv. P.THANGAVEL

Respondent(s)

K.SAMSON AND ANOTHER

L.KANDASAMY

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge

01-04-2026

Disposed

18-03-2026

Judgement

16-03-2026

Arguments

09-03-2026

Arguments

27-02-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

09-03-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence / Deposition

The court recorded the testimony of the defendant, a practicing doctor, who admitted to borrowing ₹2,74,000 as an educational loan from the bank and acknowledged signing documents (Exhibits 3, 4, 5) related to the loan, though she disputed certain claims about additional jewelry loans and income tax compliance. The judge found the defendant's testimony credible regarding the principal loan amount and documented signatures, while rejecting her denials on ancillary claims, ultimately deciding the case in accordance with the bank's claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court recorded the testimony of the defendant, a practicing doctor, who admitted to borrowing ₹2,74,000 as an educational loan from the bank and acknowledged signing documents (Exhibits 3, 4, 5) related to the loan, though she disputed certain claims about additional jewelry loans and income tax compliance. The judge found the defendant's testimony credible regarding the principal loan amount and documented signatures, while rejecting her denials on ancillary claims, ultimately deciding the case in accordance with the bank's claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Principal District Court, Karur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case