Vijaya Bank Now Bank of Baroda Mayiladuthurai Branch by its Chief Manager vs A.ALPHONSERANI AND ONE OTHER — 97/2025
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section OR7R1. Disposed: Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree on 24th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNMY030005012025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
493/2025
Filing Date
05-06-2025
Registration No
97/2025
Registration Date
09-06-2025
Court
Principal Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai
Judge
1-Principal Sub Judge
Decision Date
24th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vijaya Bank Now Bank of Baroda Mayiladuthurai Branch by its Chief Manager
Adv. Thiru. K.ALAGANANDAN
Respondent(s)
A.ALPHONSERANI AND ONE OTHER
Thangaraj
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal Sub Judge
Disposed
Judgement
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 24-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 23-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 10-03-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 23-02-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 03-02-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Mudaliarpalayam Court ruled in favor of Vijaya Bank against defendants A. Alphonsa and A. Thangaraj, ordering them to pay ₹1,44,824 plus 9% interest from the original loan date (06.03.2015) until judgment date and 6% interest thereafter. The court found that the defendants had obtained a ₹1,68,000 agricultural loan from the bank with proper loan agreements and guarantees, and despite multiple reminders, failed to repay the dues as confirmed by bank records and witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The Mudaliarpalayam Court ruled in favor of Vijaya Bank against defendants A. Alphonsa and A. Thangaraj, ordering them to pay ₹1,44,824 plus 9% interest from the original loan date (06.03.2015) until judgment date and 6% interest thereafter. The court found that the defendants had obtained a ₹1,68,000 agricultural loan from the bank with proper loan agreements and guarantees, and despite multiple reminders, failed to repay the dues as confirmed by bank records and 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