K.SANTHOSH vs A.SUBBIAH NADAR H.P.PETROL PUMP, REP BY S.R.MURUGARAJAN AND ANOTHER Advocate - K.SUBRAMANIAN — 2650/2023
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,141,142. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 18th May 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNKR020091672023
Filing Number
8348/2023
Filing Date
05-Jul-2022
Registration No
2650/2023
Registration Date
05-Jul-2022
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Karur
Judge
8-Judicial Magistrate No.II
Last updated 18-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.K.SANTHOSH
Adv. T.SATHEESHKUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.A.SUBBIAH NADAR H.P.PETROL PUMP, REP BY S.R.MURUGARAJAN AND ANOTHER Advocate - K.SUBRAMANIAN
-
2.R.MURUGARAJAN
Case History
-
18-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Apr-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
09-Mar-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
23-Feb-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
09-Feb-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence / DepositionView PDF
Summary This is a civil case (STC 2650/2023) dated 09.02.2026 from Karur District Court involving a commercial dispute. The court examined testimonies from two defendants — Santhosh and Palakrishnan — who were cross-examined regarding alleged loan fraud and document forgery claims involving a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs and disputed promissory notes. Both defendants denied the allegations and contested the authenticity of the documents presented against them, with inconsistencies noted in their accounts regarding the proof notes and witnesses involved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Feb-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
03-Feb-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
05-Jan-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
18-Dec-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
28-Nov-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
06-Nov-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
13-Oct-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
15-Sep-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
11-Aug-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
18-Jul-2025
Issue of Service
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
24-Jun-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
08-May-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
07-Apr-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
11-Mar-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
20-Jan-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
13-Nov-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
24-Sep-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
30-Aug-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
29-Jul-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
09-Jul-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
07-Jun-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
17-May-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
30-Apr-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
12-Apr-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
27-Mar-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
08-Mar-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
07-Feb-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
19-Jan-2024
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
04-Jan-2024
Cmp Pending
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
27-Dec-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
15-Dec-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
30-Nov-2023
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
28-Nov-2023
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
04-Nov-2023
Copy of Oral Evidence / DepositionView PDF
-
04-Nov-2023
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
26-Oct-2023
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
01-Sep-2023
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
28-Jul-2023
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate No.II
-
25-Jul-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Jul-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 2650/2023
Summary This is a civil case (STC 2650/2023) dated 09.02.2026 from Karur District Court involving a commercial dispute. The court examined testimonies from two defendants — Santhosh and Palakrishnan — who were cross-examined regarding alleged loan fraud and document forgery claims involving a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs and disputed promissory notes. Both defendants denied the allegations and contested the authenticity of the documents presented against them, with inconsistencies noted in their accounts regarding the proof notes and witnesses involved. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts