DR YOGENDRA NATH UPADHYA vs GOLDEN POINT LANDCON PVT LTD — 690/2016

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138/141. Status: For Appearance. Next hearing: 21st July 2026.

For Appearance Next hearing 21-Jul-2026 this date has passed

CN - COMPLAINT CASE (NORTH)

CNR: WBCS020608052016

Filing Number

116533/2016

Filing Date

04-Nov-2016

Registration No

690/2016

Registration Date

04-Nov-2016

Court

Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Calcutta

Judge

3-3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

Last updated 14-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138/141

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DR YOGENDRA NATH UPADHYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GOLDEN POINT LANDCON PVT LTD

Case History

  1. 21-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  3. 06-Nov-2025

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  4. 08-Sep-2025

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  5. 06-Jun-2025

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  6. 06-Feb-2025

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  7. 26-Nov-2024

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  8. 13-Sep-2024

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  9. 23-Apr-2024

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  10. 19-Feb-2024

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  11. 16-Oct-2023

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  12. 07-Jul-2023

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  13. 31-Mar-2023

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  14. 02-Feb-2023

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  15. 23-Nov-2022

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  16. 12-Oct-2022

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  17. 28-Jul-2022

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  18. 28-Jan-2022

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  19. 15-Dec-2021

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  20. 22-Oct-2021

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  21. 25-Jun-2021

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  22. 04-Mar-2021

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  23. 24-Sep-2020

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  24. 25-Mar-2020

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  25. 20-Feb-2020

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  26. 15-Nov-2019

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  27. 28-Aug-2019

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  28. 18-Jun-2019

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  29. 16-Apr-2019

    For Appearance

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  30. 05-Feb-2019

    E/R Of Warrent

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  31. 11-Dec-2018

    E/R Of Warrent

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  32. 24-Sep-2018

    OrderView PDF

    Case CN-116533 of 2016 | Order Date: 24.09.2018 The case was adjourned for evidence after all three accused persons failed to appear without cogent grounds. The court directed the surety to produce accused nos. 2 and 3 on the next date, with a warning that failure to do so would result in arrest warrants being issued. Additionally, accused no. 3 Sabir Pailan was directed to show cause why his liberty granted under Section 205 CrPC should not be withdrawn. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  33. 24-Sep-2018

    Evidence

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  34. 24-Jul-2018

    Evidence

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  35. 04-May-2018

    Evidence

    3 Rd. Metropolitan Magistrate .

  36. 09-Mar-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  37. 04-Nov-2016

    Case filed

    Registration No. 690/2016

casestatus.in Summary

Case CN-116533 of 2016 | Order Date: 24.09.2018 The case was adjourned for evidence after all three accused persons failed to appear without cogent grounds. The court directed the surety to produce accused nos. 2 and 3 on the next date, with a warning that failure to do so would result in arrest warrants being issued. Additionally, accused no. 3 Sabir Pailan was directed to show cause why his liberty granted under Section 205 CrPC should not be withdrawn. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case