M Pachamuthu vs K Mohan — 657/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNSA090014182024
Next Hearing
09th April 2026
e-Filing Number
08-10-2024
Filing Number
1416/2024
Filing Date
15-10-2024
Registration No
657/2024
Registration Date
20-12-2024
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Sankari
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate - I, Sankari
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M Pachamuthu
Adv. Raja Shekar V M
Respondent(s)
K Mohan
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate - I, Sankari
Evidence
Questioning
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-03-2026 | Questioning |
| 13-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 07-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 05-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No: STC No. 657/2024 | Court: Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Sankari | Date: 07.02.2026 This is a witness deposition order in a criminal case. The witness Pachamuthu's testimony regarding a loan dispute between the parties has been recorded, with the court examining his credibility on multiple assertions about loan amounts, repayment attempts, and circumstances surrounding the transaction. The witness's contradictory statements regarding various claims have been noted and scrutinized by the court during cross-examination, finding several inconsistencies in his narrative regarding dates, amounts, and the circumstances of alleged loan requests. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No: STC No. 657/2024 | Court: Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Sankari | Date: 07.02.2026 This is a witness deposition order in a criminal case. The witness Pachamuthu's testimony regarding a loan dispute between the parties has been recorded, with the court examining his credibility on multiple assertions about loan amounts, repayment attempts, and circumstances surrounding the transaction. The witness's contradictory statements regarding various claims have been noted and scrutinized by the court during cross-examination, finding several inconsistencies in his narrative regarding dates, amounts, and the circumstances of alleged loan requests. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts