The foreman S. Sankar Maniyan Chits funds Pvt Ltd vs Prabu — 35/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order21Rule11(2),Or.21 R.37,38,55. Status: For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNMY070002362025
e-Filing Number
29-10-2025
Filing Number
283/2025
Filing Date
30-Oct-2025
Registration No
35/2025
Registration Date
13-Nov-2025
Court
District Munsif Court, Sirkali
Judge
1-District Munsif
Last updated 28-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.The foreman S. Sankar Maniyan Chits funds Pvt Ltd
Adv. R ADHMANATHAN
Respondent(s)
-
1.Prabu
Case History
-
15-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
20-Apr-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF
Case Summary: E.P.No. 35/2025 Court: District Civil Court, Sirkali Date: April 20, 2026 Outcome: The court admitted the testimony of PW-1 (witness Sankar, age 44) who confirmed all statements in his affidavit were true. The witness testified that the respondent and two others have assets worth ₹10,00,000 and earn ₹30,000 monthly, establishing sufficient means to satisfy the judgment decree. The court found the respondent had adequate resources to comply with the awarded amount and proceeded with the case accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
20-Apr-2026
For Attachment/ Arrest /Garnishee Proceedings / Deposit / Payment / Claim
District Munsif
-
02-Apr-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
12-Mar-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
23-Feb-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
07-Feb-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
22-Jan-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
18-Dec-2025
Issue of Service
District Munsif
-
13-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
30-Oct-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 35/2025
Case Summary: E.P.No. 35/2025 Court: District Civil Court, Sirkali Date: April 20, 2026 Outcome: The court admitted the testimony of PW-1 (witness Sankar, age 44) who confirmed all statements in his affidavit were true. The witness testified that the respondent and two others have assets worth ₹10,00,000 and earn ₹30,000 monthly, establishing sufficient means to satisfy the judgment decree. The court found the respondent had adequate resources to comply with the awarded amount and proceeded with the case accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts