Samundeeswari vs Sivakumar Advocate - Tr.K.Sundaram — 321/2022

Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 22. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTM040008962022

Evidence

Next Hearing

10th June 2026

Filing Number

874/2022

Filing Date

05-12-2022

Registration No

321/2022

Registration Date

07-12-2022

Court

Sub Court, Cheyyar

Judge

1-Principal Subordinate JudgeCheyyar

Acts & Sections

Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 22

Petitioner(s)

Samundeeswari

Adv. Thiru. M.S. Sankarapandiyan

Respondent(s)

Sivakumar Advocate - Tr.K.Sundaram

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal Subordinate JudgeCheyyar

16-04-2026

Evidence

13-03-2026

Evidence

25-02-2026

Evidence

07-01-2026

Evidence

08-12-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

25-02-2026
Copy of Deposition

Case Summary: O.S. No. 321/2022 This is a civil suit heard on February 25, 2026, before the Principal Subordinate Judge at Cheyyar. Petitioner Samundeeswari (45, housewife) testified regarding a loan dispute with respondent Sivakumar. The court recorded her cross-examination statements confirming that the defendant and her husband had business dealings, the defendant purchased items, and her husband provided money approximately 4-5 years before filing the suit. She stated she has no independent income and is a homemaker. The defendant allegedly did not pay interest on the borrowed amount. The document records the witness examination findings and is signed by the judge, though no final order/judgment outcome is explicitly stated in this excerpt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. No. 321/2022 This is a civil suit heard on February 25, 2026, before the Principal Subordinate Judge at Cheyyar. Petitioner Samundeeswari (45, housewife) testified regarding a loan dispute with respondent Sivakumar. The court recorded her cross-examination statements confirming that the defendant and her husband had business dealings, the defendant purchased items, and her husband provided money approximately 4-5 years before filing the suit. She stated she has no independent income and is a homemaker. The defendant allegedly did not pay interest on the borrowed amount. The document records the witness examination findings and is signed by the judge, though no final order/judgment outcome is explicitly stated in this excerpt. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Sub Court, Cheyyar All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case