Piramal Capital and Housing Finance ltd vs Ulaganathan — 223/2025
Case under Securitisationandreconstructionoffinancialassets&enforcementofsecurityinterestact Section 14 1 and 2. Status: Await Reports. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNVR020009832025
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
e-Filing Number
17-03-2025
Filing Number
929/2025
Filing Date
25-03-2025
Registration No
223/2025
Registration Date
25-03-2025
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar
Judge
2-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Piramal Capital and Housing Finance ltd
Adv. Ganesan V
Respondent(s)
Ulaganathan
Bagavathi
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Chief Judicial Magistrate
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
Await Reports
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Await Reports |
| 20-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 06-02-2026 | Await Reports |
| 23-01-2026 | Await Reports |
| 03-01-2026 | Await Reports |
Interim Orders
ORDER SUMMARY The petition filed by Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd. under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act 2002 has been allowed. The court directed an Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the mortgaged property (valued at Rs. 26,58,887) located in Chinnamoopanpatti Village, Virudhunagar District, after the borrowers defaulted on loan repayment and failed to surrender possession despite demand and possession notices. Police assistance was authorized for executing the warrant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
ORDER SUMMARY The petition filed by Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd. under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act 2002 has been allowed. The court directed an Advocate Commissioner to take physical possession of the mortgaged property (valued at Rs. 26,58,887) located in Chinnamoopanpatti Village, Virudhunagar District, after the borrowers defaulted on loan repayment and failed to surrender possession despite demand and possession notices. Police assistance was authorized for executing the warrant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts