STATE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, VEERAGANUR vs P. SAMPOORANAM Advocate - Exparte — 349/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section U/Or.7R1to6. Disposed: Uncontested--Decreed with cost on 10th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA130003842022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
671/2022
Filing Date
23-12-2022
Registration No
349/2022
Registration Date
23-12-2022
Court
District Munsif Court, Attur
Judge
2-Principal District Munsif, Attur
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Decreed with cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE BANK OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, VEERAGANUR
Adv. MUTHUSAMY.N
Respondent(s)
P. SAMPOORANAM Advocate - Exparte
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Principal District Munsif, Attur
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 04-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 04-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 08-01-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 15-12-2025 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Principal District Munsif Court, Attur, decreed in favor of State Bank of India against defendant P. Sampooranam for recovery of Rs. 78,680.40 (outstanding loan amount) with 6% per annum interest from the suit filing date until realization, plus court costs. The court found the defendant defaulted on a Rs. 50,000 Kissan Credit Cash Crop loan sanctioned in 2018, and since the defendant failed to appear or contest the claim, the plaintiff's documentary evidence proved the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Principal District Munsif Court, Attur, decreed in favor of State Bank of India against defendant P. Sampooranam for recovery of Rs. 78,680.40 (outstanding loan amount) with 6% per annum interest from the suit filing date until realization, plus court costs. The court found the defendant defaulted on a Rs. 50,000 Kissan Credit Cash Crop loan sanctioned in 2018, and since the defendant failed to appear or contest the claim, the plaintiff's documentary evidence proved the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts