Bharatharajan vs Manikandan — 135/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNSV120024162024
e-Filing Number
19-08-2024
Filing Number
2415/2024
Filing Date
22-Aug-2024
Registration No
135/2024
Registration Date
22-Aug-2024
Court
Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Karaikudi
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
Last updated 29-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Bharatharajan
Adv. S Gowtham
Respondent(s)
-
1.Manikandan
Case History
-
02-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
25-May-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
18-May-2026
Counter
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
04-May-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
16-Apr-2026
Copy of depositionView PDF
-
16-Apr-2026
Copy of depositionView PDF
Case Summary: CC No. 135/2024 Court: Fast Track Court, Karaikudi Date: 16.04.2026 This is a civil case involving a commercial dispute between Bharatharajan (petitioner) and Manikandan (respondent) regarding goods and payment transactions. Bharatharajan testified that he supplied goods worth approximately ₹10.4 lakh to Manikandan on 04.02.2024, receiving ₹40,000 cash and two post-dated cheques (₹5 lakhs each, dated 04.05.2024 and 04.06.2024). The dispute centers on whether goods were actually delivered and payment obligations. The court recorded Bharatharajan's cross-examination testimony, which he affirmed as truthful. The order documents the witness examination process and the testimony given before the court, though the final judgment outcome is not explicitly stated in the document provided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Apr-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
02-Apr-2026
Service Pending
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
26-Mar-2026
Service Pending
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
12-Mar-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
26-Feb-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
12-Feb-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
29-Jan-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
08-Jan-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
04-Dec-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
20-Nov-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
23-Oct-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
25-Sep-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
21-Aug-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
07-Aug-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
16-Jul-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
24-Jun-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
21-Jun-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
23-May-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
24-Apr-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
27-Mar-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
27-Jan-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
24-Dec-2024
Trial
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
10-Dec-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
26-Nov-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
21-Oct-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
23-Sep-2024
Issue of Process
Judicial Magistrate (Ftc ML), Karaikudi
-
22-Aug-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Aug-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 135/2024
Case Summary: CC No. 135/2024 Court: Fast Track Court, Karaikudi Date: 16.04.2026 This is a civil case involving a commercial dispute between Bharatharajan (petitioner) and Manikandan (respondent) regarding goods and payment transactions. Bharatharajan testified that he supplied goods worth approximately ₹10.4 lakh to Manikandan on 04.02.2024, receiving ₹40,000 cash and two post-dated cheques (₹5 lakhs each, dated 04.05.2024 and 04.06.2024). The dispute centers on whether goods were actually delivered and payment obligations. The court recorded Bharatharajan's cross-examination testimony, which he affirmed as truthful. The order documents the witness examination process and the testimony given before the court, though the final judgment outcome is not explicitly stated in the document provided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts