R Anantha kumar M s Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd Power of Attorney vs SI of police, M.Pudupatti PS — 150/2026
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 503,498. Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 11th March 2026.
CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
CNR: TNVR170003132026
e-Filing Number
05-02-2026
Filing Number
311/2026
Filing Date
10-Feb-2026
Registration No
150/2026
Registration Date
10-Feb-2026
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Sivakasi
Judge
2-Judicial Magistrate No-II
Decision Date
11-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Dismissed
Last updated 19-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.R Anantha kumar M s Sriram Transport Finance Company Ltd Power of Attorney
Adv. RAGU R
Respondent(s)
-
1.SI of police, M.Pudupatti PS (Police Station)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
The Judicial Magistrate Court No. 2, Sivakasi dismissed the petition filed by Sri Ram Finance Company seeking custody of vehicle TN 58 AT 3902 seized in a criminal case. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide documentary evidence proving that the vehicle was financed through their company or that the defendant defaulted on loan payments, and therefore rejected the petition for lack of substantiation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
10-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
09-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
07-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
06-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
04-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
03-Mar-2026
Orders
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
12-Feb-2026
Issue of Service
Judicial Magistrate No-II
-
10-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
10-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 150/2026
The Judicial Magistrate Court No. 2, Sivakasi dismissed the petition filed by Sri Ram Finance Company seeking custody of vehicle TN 58 AT 3902 seized in a criminal case. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide documentary evidence proving that the vehicle was financed through their company or that the defendant defaulted on loan payments, and therefore rejected the petition for lack of substantiation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts