LOGANATHAN vs JABBACHRISTOPER — 853/2022
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNVL240036572022
Filing Number
3655/2022
Filing Date
24-Aug-2022
Registration No
853/2022
Registration Date
24-Aug-2022
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Katpadi
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
Last updated 25-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.LOGANATHAN
Adv. RAVI K R
Respondent(s)
-
1.JABBACHRISTOPER
Case History
-
17-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
23-Jan-2026
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
28-Nov-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
03-Oct-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
19-Sep-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
29-Aug-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
25-Jul-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
17-Jun-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
20-May-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
05-Apr-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
26-Mar-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
19-Mar-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
24-Feb-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
26-Dec-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
26-Nov-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
22-Oct-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
10-Sep-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
07-Aug-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
23-Jul-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
18-Jun-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
21-May-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
30-Apr-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
26-Mar-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
27-Feb-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
23-Jan-2024
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
12-Dec-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
12-Dec-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
07-Nov-2023
Copy of DepositionView PDF
Summary: In this cross-examination of Witness 1 (S.T.C. No. 853/2022, dated 07.11.2023), the court examined the witness's testimony regarding a money lending dispute involving an alleged loan of Rs. 20 with interest given on 12.12.2020. The witness's claims regarding the promissory note, the provision of two receipts as security by the defendant, and allegations against the defendant's father were largely rejected as untruthful. The court found inconsistencies in the witness's account and ruled that the defendant's position regarding the loan transaction was more credible than the plaintiff's claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
07-Nov-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
31-Oct-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
26-Sep-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
28-Aug-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
12-Jul-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
21-Jun-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
23-May-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
21-Apr-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
13-Apr-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
11-Apr-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
21-Mar-2023
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
21-Mar-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
07-Feb-2023
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
28-Dec-2022
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
29-Nov-2022
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
15-Nov-2022
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
11-Oct-2022
Service Pending
Judicial Magistrate,Katpadi
-
24-Aug-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 853/2022
-
23-Aug-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
Summary: In this cross-examination of Witness 1 (S.T.C. No. 853/2022, dated 07.11.2023), the court examined the witness's testimony regarding a money lending dispute involving an alleged loan of Rs. 20 with interest given on 12.12.2020. The witness's claims regarding the promissory note, the provision of two receipts as security by the defendant, and allegations against the defendant's father were largely rejected as untruthful. The court found inconsistencies in the witness's account and ruled that the defendant's position regarding the loan transaction was more credible than the plaintiff's claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts