Sankari vs Prabhu Advocate - E. Nagarajan B.A., B.L., — 209/2023
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 12th March 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNPB060010972023
Next Hearing
12th March 2026
Filing Number
1097/2023
Filing Date
06-07-2023
Registration No
209/2023
Registration Date
06-07-2023
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Veppanthattai
Judge
11-DISTRICT MUNSIF-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VEPPANTHATTAI.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sankari
Adv. C. Balaji M.A., B.L.,
Respondent(s)
Prabhu Advocate - E. Nagarajan B.A., B.L.,
Hearing History
Judge: 11-DISTRICT MUNSIF-CUM-JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VEPPANTHATTAI.
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 22-01-2026 | Arguments |
| 29-12-2025 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a deposition of witness (PW-1) recorded on 27.11.2025 in case STC.209/2023 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Veppanthattai. The prosecution witness, M. Velmurugan (Junior Supervisor), testified that the accused worked as Grade-2 Foreman in 2014 and on 15.10.2016 was present at the office with no permission granted to leave, as evidenced by the attendance register. The witness' testimony was subject to cross-examination by the defence, during which the accused's counsel questioned the authenticity and completeness of the attendance records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a deposition of witness (PW-1) recorded on 27.11.2025 in case STC.209/2023 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Veppanthattai. The prosecution witness, M. Velmurugan (Junior Supervisor), testified that the accused worked as Grade-2 Foreman in 2014 and on 15.10.2016 was present at the office with no permission granted to leave, as evidenced by the attendance register. The witness' testimony was subject to cross-examination by the defence, during which the accused's counsel questioned the authenticity and completeness of the attendance records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts