State Bank of Indina Ref. By its Branch Manager, Thiruvengadu Branch vs Priyanka — 199/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or-7, R1, 2 Or-34, R-1, 2. Disposed: Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNMY060012402024

Filing Number

524/2024

Filing Date

21-Aug-2024

Registration No

199/2024

Registration Date

21-Aug-2024

Court

Sub Court, Sirkali

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Or-7, R1, 2 Or-34, R-1, 2

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Bank of Indina Ref. By its Branch Manager, Thiruvengadu Branch

    Adv. R.Ravichandaran

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Priyanka

  2. 2.Jayanthi

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    Copy of Judgment/OrderView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Subordinate Court of Sirkali decreed the suit filed by State Bank of India against defendants Priyanka and Jayanthi for recovery of an education loan. The court directed the defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs. 2,45,233/- with 6% interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs. 2,02,208/- from the date of plaint until realization, plus costs. Since the defendants failed to contest the suit despite being served summons, the court accepted the bank's evidence, including signed loan documents and revival letters acknowledging the debt, and drew adverse inferences against the defendants' non-appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  9. 24-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  10. 02-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  11. 20-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  12. 19-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  13. 04-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  14. 21-Nov-2025

    Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF

  15. 21-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  16. 19-Nov-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  17. 17-Nov-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  18. 08-Oct-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  19. 13-Aug-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  20. 29-Jul-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  21. 12-Jun-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  22. 04-Apr-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  23. 26-Mar-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  24. 14-Feb-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  25. 06-Feb-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  26. 28-Jan-2025

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  27. 18-Dec-2024

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  28. 25-Nov-2024

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  29. 13-Nov-2024

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  30. 23-Sep-2024

    Ex-Parte Evidence

    Subordinate Judge, Sirkali

  31. 21-Aug-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 21-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 199/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Subordinate Court of Sirkali decreed the suit filed by State Bank of India against defendants Priyanka and Jayanthi for recovery of an education loan. The court directed the defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs. 2,45,233/- with 6% interest per annum on the principal amount of Rs. 2,02,208/- from the date of plaint until realization, plus costs. Since the defendants failed to contest the suit despite being served summons, the court accepted the bank's evidence, including signed loan documents and revival letters acknowledging the debt, and drew adverse inferences against the defendants' non-appearance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case