BALACHANDAR vs SYED SAHUL HAMEEDH — 403/2021

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.

STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case

CNR: TNRP040005602021

Evidence

Next Hearing

23rd April 2026

Filing Number

518/2021

Filing Date

08-04-2021

Registration No

403/2021

Registration Date

02-08-2021

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Ranipet

Judge

5-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138
Mp/6/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section SYED SAHUL HAMEEDHBALACHANDAR
Mp/10/2025 Classification : 317 Cr.pc Section SYED SAHUL HAMEEDHBALACHANDAR

Petitioner(s)

BALACHANDAR

Adv. SELVARAJ A G

Respondent(s)

SYED SAHUL HAMEEDH

Hearing History

Judge: 5-District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet

05-03-2026

Evidence

22-01-2026

Evidence

12-12-2025

Evidence

06-11-2025

Evidence

10-10-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

07-10-2024
Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

Case STC.NO.403/2021 - Cross-examination of Witness (Lakshandran) This is a record of witness examination dated 07.10.2024 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet. The witness testified regarding a cheque (No. 832044) for Rs. 22,84,000 given on 20.02.2021, though the witness paid only Rs. 19,15,000 principal amount. The court found issues with the cheque being improperly filled by the witness himself rather than by the opposing party, and noted discrepancies in the witness's testimony regarding the transaction details and intended purpose. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case STC.NO.403/2021 - Cross-examination of Witness (Lakshandran) This is a record of witness examination dated 07.10.2024 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet. The witness testified regarding a cheque (No. 832044) for Rs. 22,84,000 given on 20.02.2021, though the witness paid only Rs. 19,15,000 principal amount. The court found issues with the cheque being improperly filled by the witness himself rather than by the opposing party, and noted discrepancies in the witness's testimony regarding the transaction details and intended purpose. 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, Ranipet All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case