NARAYANASAMY vs VETRI MURUGAN — 224/2026

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 AND 142. Status: Questioning. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

Questioning Next hearing 25-Mar-2026 this date has passed

STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case

CNR: TNVR020000672026

e-Filing Number

29-12-2025

Filing Number

66/2026

Filing Date

05-Jan-2026

Registration No

224/2026

Registration Date

23-Jan-2026

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar

Judge

7-Judicial Magistrate(FTC)

Last updated 19-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 AND 142
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 223

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NARAYANASAMY

    Adv. Selvam M

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.VETRI MURUGAN

Case History

  1. 25-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate(FTC)

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate(FTC)

  4. 26-Feb-2026

    Questioning

    Judicial Magistrate(FTC)

  5. 23-Jan-2026

    Copy of Deposition/EvidenceView PDF

    This document is a deposition of witness (P.W. 1) recorded before the Judicial Fast Track Magistrate, Srivilliputtur, in case STC.No. 224/2026, dated 23.01.2026. The witness (complainant Narayanaswami) deposited pre-summons evidence and produced supporting documents including bank receipts for ₹2,50,000, legal notices, and postal acknowledgments, seeking punishment of the accused and compensation. The deposition was transcribed, read back to the witness, and confirmed as correct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 23-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 05-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 224/2026

casestatus.in Summary

This document is a deposition of witness (P.W. 1) recorded before the Judicial Fast Track Magistrate, Srivilliputtur, in case STC.No. 224/2026, dated 23.01.2026. The witness (complainant Narayanaswami) deposited pre-summons evidence and produced supporting documents including bank receipts for ₹2,50,000, legal notices, and postal acknowledgments, seeking punishment of the accused and compensation. The deposition was transcribed, read back to the witness, and confirmed as correct. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case