NAGARAJAN vs VENKATESAN — 116/2024
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section Sec26,Or7,Ru1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed with cost on 02nd April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTM240003272024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
164/2024
Filing Date
14-11-2022
Registration No
116/2024
Registration Date
14-11-2022
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Kilpennathur
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Kilpennathur
Decision Date
02nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed with cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NAGARAJAN
Adv. THIRU. S. KANNAN
Respondent(s)
VENKATESAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Kilpennathur
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 01-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 27-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 24-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 17-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Copy of Judgment
Interim Orders
This document is a witness examination transcript (PW2 testimony) in a civil suit before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court in Kilpennathur, Tamil Nadu. The witness testifies about a promissory note (loan agreement) for Rs. 50,000 with interest, and admits under cross-examination that he provided false testimony by using the defendant's father's incorrect name and the defendant's forged signature, acknowledging he intentionally conspired to deceive the court. The judge's concluding remarks affirm the witness testimony as recorded and note the procedural compliance with evidence documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a witness examination transcript (PW2 testimony) in a civil suit before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court in Kilpennathur, Tamil Nadu. The witness testifies about a promissory note (loan agreement) for Rs. 50,000 with interest, and admits under cross-examination that he provided false testimony by using the defendant's father's incorrect name and the defendant's forged signature, acknowledging he intentionally conspired to deceive the court. The judge's concluding remarks affirm the witness testimony as recorded and note the procedural compliance with evidence documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts