Sheik Mujibur Rahman vs Mohammed Fisal Kalith — 24/2024

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 12th May 2026.

STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case

CNR: TNMY090004772024

Part Heard

Next Hearing

12th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

456/2024

Filing Date

14-02-2024

Registration No

24/2024

Registration Date

14-02-2024

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi

Judge

1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 Section 138
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 Section 200
MP/1/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.PC Section Sheik Mujibur RahmanMohammed Fisal Kalith

Petitioner(s)

Sheik Mujibur Rahman

Adv. Thiru P.GANESAMOORTHY

Respondent(s)

Mohammed Fisal Kalith

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi

21-04-2026

Part Heard

24-03-2026

Part Heard

10-03-2026

Part Heard

24-02-2026

Part Heard

17-02-2026

Part Heard

Interim Orders

24-02-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

This document is a deposition of witness (cross-examination) in case STC No. 24/2024 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Tharangambadi, recorded on 24.02.2026. The witness (PW-2) testified regarding monetary transactions, specifically denying that ₹25 lakhs was given directly or that ₹13 lakhs was transferred via online transaction, and refuted claims of giving false testimony. The document contains the witness's sworn statement during cross-examination but does not constitute a final court order or judgment on the case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

This document is a deposition of witness (cross-examination) in case STC No. 24/2024 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Tharangambadi, recorded on 24.02.2026. The witness (PW-2) testified regarding monetary transactions, specifically denying that ₹25 lakhs was given directly or that ₹13 lakhs was transferred via online transaction, and refuted claims of giving false testimony. The document contains the witness's sworn statement during cross-examination but does not constitute a final court order or judgment on the case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Tharangambadi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case