B.SAMPOORANAM vs K.R.C.INVESTMENTS REP BY ITS PARTNER A.RAVI AND 2 OTHERS — 2635/2023
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat on 14th March 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNKR020090892023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
8282/2023
Filing Date
24-07-2023
Registration No
2635/2023
Registration Date
24-07-2023
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Karur
Judge
8-Judicial Magistrate No.II
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
B.SAMPOORANAM
Adv. A.PANDIAN
Respondent(s)
K.R.C.INVESTMENTS REP BY ITS PARTNER A.RAVI AND 2 OTHERS
A.RAVI
S.KARUNANITHI
Hearing History
Judge: 8-Judicial Magistrate No.II
Disposed
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 09-02-2026 | Evidence | |
| 27-01-2026 | Evidence | |
| 19-01-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary This Tamil Nadu civil court judgment (S.D.C. No. 2635/2023, dated 12.04.2024) involves a dispute concerning a loan transaction and alleged fraudulent documents. The court examined testimony from the plaintiff and defendants regarding a loan allegedly given in 2008 by the plaintiff to the defendants' finance company, with disputes over promissory notes, mortgage documents, and the defendants' claims that the loan was fabricated to pursue false litigation. The court found insufficient evidence to support the plaintiff's claims that the defendants obtained unlawful loans and ruled that the case lacked merit and credibility based on contradictory statements and lack of supporting documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary This Tamil Nadu civil court judgment (S.D.C. No. 2635/2023, dated 12.04.2024) involves a dispute concerning a loan transaction and alleged fraudulent documents. The court examined testimony from the plaintiff and defendants regarding a loan allegedly given in 2008 by the plaintiff to the defendants' finance company, with disputes over promissory notes, mortgage documents, and the defendants' claims that the loan was fabricated to pursue false litigation. The court found insufficient evidence to support the plaintiff's claims that the defendants obtained unlawful loans and ruled that the case lacked merit and credibility based on contradictory statements and lack of supporting documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts