Murugesan vs A.Narayanasamy — 106/2022

Case under Suits Valuation Act Section sec22. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 13th July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 13-Jul-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNVP190004182022

Filing Number

484/2022

Filing Date

08-Jun-2022

Registration No

106/2022

Registration Date

10-Jun-2022

Court

Sub Court, Gingee

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Suits Valuation Act Section sec22

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Murugesan

    Adv. Thiru.A.Devakumar, B.Sc., B.L.,

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.A.Narayanasamy

Case History

  1. 13-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 10-Jun-2026

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  3. 20-Apr-2026

    Additional Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Additional Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    Additional Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  6. 03-Feb-2026

    Additional Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  7. 02-Jan-2026

    Amendment

    Subordinate Judge

  8. 25-Nov-2025

    Amendment

    Subordinate Judge

  9. 22-Oct-2025

    Amendment

    Subordinate Judge

  10. 01-Sep-2025

    Amendment

    Subordinate Judge

  11. 23-Jul-2025

    Amendment

    Subordinate Judge

  12. 30-Jun-2025

    Steps

    Subordinate Judge

  13. 11-Jun-2025

    Steps

    Subordinate Judge

  14. 02-Apr-2025

    Steps

    Subordinate Judge

  15. 19-Feb-2025

    Steps

    Subordinate Judge

  16. 28-Jan-2025

    IA Pending

    Subordinate Judge

  17. 18-Dec-2024

    IA Pending

    Subordinate Judge

  18. 27-Nov-2024

    IA Pending

    Subordinate Judge

  19. 25-Nov-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  20. 25-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  21. 12-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  22. 19-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  23. 05-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  24. 01-Aug-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  25. 23-Jul-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  26. 09-Jul-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  27. 03-Jul-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  28. 21-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  29. 11-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  30. 07-Jun-2024

    DepositionView PDF

    Summary of Case 106/2022: Murugesan vs A.Narayanasamy In this civil suit heard on 07.06.2024, the court examined testimony regarding a loan dispute. The petitioner (Murugesan), a village administrative officer, claimed to have borrowed ₹50,000 from respondent A. Narayanasamy and provided a promissory note dated 30.11.2022. However, cross-examination revealed significant inconsistencies: the petitioner never mentioned this promissory note in his initial statement or counter-claim, contradicting his credibility. The court found the petitioner's testimony unreliable on material facts and concluded that he failed to establish his claim with proper documentary evidence or consistent statements. The case proceeded with examination of witnesses and recording of evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1969. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  31. 07-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  32. 15-Apr-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  33. 21-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  34. 07-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  35. 28-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  36. 14-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  37. 31-Jan-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  38. 31-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  39. 18-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  40. 08-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  41. 20-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  42. 08-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  43. 24-Nov-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  44. 24-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  45. 08-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  46. 31-Oct-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  47. 31-Oct-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  48. 12-Oct-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  49. 26-Sep-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  50. 26-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  51. 12-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  52. 31-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  53. 23-Aug-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  54. 23-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  55. 14-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  56. 31-Jul-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  57. 31-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  58. 24-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  59. 17-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  60. 10-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  61. 03-Jul-2023

    DepositionView PDF

  62. 03-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Subordinate Judge

  63. 01-Jun-2023

    Trial

    Subordinate Judge

  64. 01-Mar-2023

    Trial

    Subordinate Judge

  65. 01-Feb-2023

    Issues

    Subordinate Judge

  66. 05-Jan-2023

    Issues

    Subordinate Judge

  67. 08-Nov-2022

    Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  68. 13-Sep-2022

    Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  69. 12-Jul-2022

    Written Statement

    Subordinate Judge

  70. 10-Jun-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  71. 08-Jun-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 106/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 106/2022: Murugesan vs A.Narayanasamy In this civil suit heard on 07.06.2024, the court examined testimony regarding a loan dispute. The petitioner (Murugesan), a village administrative officer, claimed to have borrowed ₹50,000 from respondent A. Narayanasamy and provided a promissory note dated 30.11.2022. However, cross-examination revealed significant inconsistencies: the petitioner never mentioned this promissory note in his initial statement or counter-claim, contradicting his credibility. The court found the petitioner's testimony unreliable on material facts and concluded that he failed to establish his claim with proper documentary evidence or consistent statements. The case proceeded with examination of witnesses and recording of evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1969. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case