karnan vs latha — 158/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
CC - Calendar Case
CNR: TNSV120026132024
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
e-Filing Number
11-09-2024
Filing Number
2612/2024
Filing Date
13-09-2024
Registration No
158/2024
Registration Date
13-09-2024
Court
Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Karaikudi
Judge
3-Judicial Magistrate (FTC ML), Karaikudi
FIR Details
Police Station
Alagapapuram Police Station
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
karnan
Adv. Karthik Vakil
Respondent(s)
latha
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Judicial Magistrate (FTC ML), Karaikudi
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 20-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 14-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CC No. 158/2024 Petitioner: Karnan | Respondent: Latha | Date: 14.05.2026 In this cross-examination testimony (recorded under the Indian Evidence Act, 1873), petitioner Karnan testified regarding a loan dispute with respondent Latha. Karnan claimed he lent approximately Rs. 2 lakhs to Latha for real estate purposes, with total outstanding claims across 4-5 cases amounting to approximately Rs. 6 lakhs. However, during cross-examination, Karnan admitted to significant inconsistencies: he could not provide proper documentation or witness verification for the alleged loans, lacked government authorization as a moneylender, could not explain details about Latha's business or financial status despite knowing her for 3.5 years, and failed to produce signed agreements. The court found his testimony unconvincing and lacking credibility regarding the alleged loan transactions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CC No. 158/2024 Petitioner: Karnan | Respondent: Latha | Date: 14.05.2026 In this cross-examination testimony (recorded under the Indian Evidence Act, 1873), petitioner Karnan testified regarding a loan dispute with respondent Latha. Karnan claimed he lent approximately Rs. 2 lakhs to Latha for real estate purposes, with total outstanding claims across 4-5 cases amounting to approximately Rs. 6 lakhs. However, during cross-examination, Karnan admitted to significant inconsistencies: he could not provide proper documentation or witness verification for the alleged loans, lacked government authorization as a moneylender, could not explain details about Latha's business or financial status despite knowing her for 3.5 years, and failed to produce signed agreements. The court found his testimony unconvincing and lacking credibility regarding the alleged loan transactions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts