RAJAMANICKAM T vs RAFIYA KAWAL S Advocate - RANJITHKUMAR — 116/2022

Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 22. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 20th April 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTU070004102022

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

434/2022

Filing Date

02-06-2022

Registration No

116/2022

Registration Date

03-06-2022

Court

Sub Court, Vaniyambadi

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi

Decision Date

20th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

COURT FEES ACT, 1870 Section 22
IA/2/2025 Classification : 151 Petition Section RAJAMANICKAM TRAFIYA KAWAL S
IA/4/2026 Classification : 151 Petition Section RAJAMANICKAM TRAFIYA KAWAL S

Petitioner(s)

RAJAMANICKAM T

Adv. VARADARAJAN R V

Respondent(s)

RAFIYA KAWAL S Advocate - RANJITHKUMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi

20-04-2026

Disposed

09-04-2026

Judgement

06-04-2026

Arguments

02-04-2026

Arguments

27-03-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

20-04-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

The Sub Court of Vaniyambadi held that the plaintiff is entitled to recover ₹6,04,950 from the defendant, comprising ₹6,00,000 principal loan amount and accrued interest at 12% per annum from the date of filing until judgment, and thereafter at 9% per annum. The court found that the defendant had borrowed ₹6,00,000 from the plaintiff for family and medical expenses, evidenced by bank deposit slips and a promissory note dated 26.03.2022, which the defendant failed to repay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

The Sub Court of Vaniyambadi held that the plaintiff is entitled to recover ₹6,04,950 from the defendant, comprising ₹6,00,000 principal loan amount and accrued interest at 12% per annum from the date of filing until judgment, and thereafter at 9% per annum. The court found that the defendant had borrowed ₹6,00,000 from the plaintiff for family and medical expenses, evidenced by bank deposit slips and a promissory note dated 26.03.2022, which the defendant failed to repay. 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, Vaniyambadi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case