The Branch Manager, State Bank of India vs C.Balakrishnan — 38/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 22. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTM030000592024
Next Hearing
09th April 2026
Filing Number
62/2024
Filing Date
02-01-2024
Registration No
38/2024
Registration Date
30-01-2024
Court
Sub Court, Arani
Judge
1-Subordinate Judge,Arni
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Branch Manager, State Bank of India
Adv. S.S.Jayaprakash B.Com., B.L.,
Respondent(s)
C.Balakrishnan
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge,Arni
Trial
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
Issues
Issues
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Trial |
| 23-02-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 28-01-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 12-12-2025 | Issues |
| 24-11-2025 | Issues |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Application I.A.No.01/2024 in O.S.No.38/2024 - DISMISSED State Bank of India sought attachment before judgment of the defendant's property to secure recovery of an agricultural loan of ₹87,000 borrowed on 23.01.2019 and not repaid. The court dismissed the application, finding that the bank's allegations that the defendant was attempting to transfer the property were bald assertions lacking specific details (such as to whom the property was being sold). The court held that attachment before judgment is an extraordinary remedy requiring prima facie proof of a valid claim and concrete evidence of property disposal with intent to obstruct decree execution, which was absent here. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Application I.A.No.01/2024 in O.S.No.38/2024 - DISMISSED State Bank of India sought attachment before judgment of the defendant's property to secure recovery of an agricultural loan of ₹87,000 borrowed on 23.01.2019 and not repaid. The court dismissed the application, finding that the bank's allegations that the defendant was attempting to transfer the property were bald assertions lacking specific details (such as to whom the property was being sold). The court held that attachment before judgment is an extraordinary remedy requiring prima facie proof of a valid claim and concrete evidence of property disposal with intent to obstruct decree execution, which was absent here. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts