KARUR DISTRICT SAKAJA NALAVAZHVU SANGAM, REP BY ITS SECRETARY C.GANESH KUMAR vs SAMIYAPPAN — 149/2021
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section O7R1. Status: For further Proceedings. Next hearing: 18th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKR010018292021
Next Hearing
18th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
743/2021
Filing Date
13-08-2021
Registration No
149/2021
Registration Date
13-08-2021
Court
Principal District Court, Karur
Judge
1-District Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KARUR DISTRICT SAKAJA NALAVAZHVU SANGAM, REP BY ITS SECRETARY C.GANESH KUMAR
Adv. A.PRABAKARAN
Respondent(s)
SAMIYAPPAN
ANURAMMAN PAYARAGULE KALVI SAMAYA SAMUGA NALA TRUST BY ITS PRESIDENT
S.GANESH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 07-04-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 06-04-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 02-04-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 01-04-2026 | For further Proceedings |
Interim Orders
Summary of Court Order O.S.No. 149/2021 Court: Civil Court, Thadipalayam (Tamil Nadu) Date: 02.11.2023 The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit regarding a loan dispute dated 16.08.2018. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant borrowed Rs. 30 lakhs, as the documentary evidence (signatures and handwriting) on the loan deed did not match the defendant's authenticated writing samples, and the plaintiff could not credibly prove the loan transaction through witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Court Order O.S.No. 149/2021 Court: Civil Court, Thadipalayam (Tamil Nadu) Date: 02.11.2023 The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit regarding a loan dispute dated 16.08.2018. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant borrowed Rs. 30 lakhs, as the documentary evidence (signatures and handwriting) on the loan deed did not match the defendant's authenticated writing samples, and the plaintiff could not credibly prove the loan transaction through witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts