Perumal vs Eswaran Advocate - T Thirupppathiraju — 666/2024
Case under --- Section 138 Act. Status: Await Records. Next hearing: 08th April 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNVR020033522024
e-Filing Number
26-07-2024
Filing Number
3092/2024
Filing Date
29-Jul-2024
Registration No
666/2024
Registration Date
29-Jul-2024
Court
Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar
Judge
7-Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
Last updated 19-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Perumal
Adv. Senthilkumar P
Respondent(s)
-
1.Eswaran Advocate - T Thirupppathiraju
Case History
-
08-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
16-Mar-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
06-Mar-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
23-Feb-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
05-Feb-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
22-Jan-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
12-Jan-2026
Await Records
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
24-Dec-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
11-Dec-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
28-Nov-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
21-Nov-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
07-Nov-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
28-Oct-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
14-Oct-2025
Appearance
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
24-Sep-2025
Service Pending-Summon
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
16-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
03-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
21-Aug-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
11-Aug-2025
Counter
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
31-Jul-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
18-Jul-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
08-Jul-2025
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
25-Jun-2025
Copy of Deposition/EvidenceView PDF
Summary In this Tamil court order (STC No. 666/2024, dated 25.06.2025), the Court examined the cross-examination testimony of PW.1 (Perumal) regarding a financial dispute involving alleged unauthorized lending at 24% interest through an organization called Besalvajothi Works. The witness's testimony concerning payment receipts, cheques, bank transfers, and threatening behavior was largely challenged and discredited through cross-examination. The court found the witness's statements regarding the full repayment of ₹35,45,380/- and claims about threats and police involvement to be inconsistent and unsubstantiated, ultimately accepting certain parts of the written statement while rejecting major portions of the witness's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Jun-2025
Evidence
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
13-Jun-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
04-Jun-2025
Copy of Deposition/EvidenceView PDF
-
04-Jun-2025
Part Heard
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
26-May-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
14-May-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
21-Apr-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
20-Mar-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
20-Feb-2025
Trial
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
22-Jan-2025
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
11-Dec-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
19-Nov-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
14-Oct-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
14-Sep-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
04-Sep-2024
Lok Adalat
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
29-Aug-2024
Questioning
Judicial Magistrate(FTC)
-
29-Jul-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Jul-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 666/2024
Summary In this Tamil court order (STC No. 666/2024, dated 25.06.2025), the Court examined the cross-examination testimony of PW.1 (Perumal) regarding a financial dispute involving alleged unauthorized lending at 24% interest through an organization called Besalvajothi Works. The witness's testimony concerning payment receipts, cheques, bank transfers, and threatening behavior was largely challenged and discredited through cross-examination. The court found the witness's statements regarding the full repayment of ₹35,45,380/- and claims about threats and police involvement to be inconsistent and unsubstantiated, ultimately accepting certain parts of the written statement while rejecting major portions of the witness's narrative. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts