PAWAN KUMAR vs KUMUD RANJAN PANDEY — 84/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 123. Disposed: Uncontested--Full Satisfaction on 22nd April 2026.

Case disposed

Scc Suit

CNR: WBSP070003172026

Filing Number

300/2026

Filing Date

03-Feb-2026

Registration No

84/2026

Registration Date

03-Feb-2026

Court

Additional District Judge, Sealdeh, South 24 Parganas

Judge

7-Scc

Decision Date

22-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Full Satisfaction

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 123

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PAWAN KUMAR

    Adv. INDRANI GHOSH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KUMUD RANJAN PANDEY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 22-Apr-2026

    orderView PDF

    Case 84/2026 Summary: The court decreed ex-parte in favor of petitioner Pawan Kumar against respondent Kumud Ranjan Pandey for recovery of Rs. 7,500/- loaned on 18/02/2024. The court accepted Kumar's unchallenged testimony supported by a promissory note (Exhibit-2) and found he had proven his case. Pandey must pay the decretal amount within three months or face execution proceedings; additionally, Kumar was penalized Rs. 75/- for failing to file a money lending license under the Bengal Money Lender's Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 22-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Scc

  4. 21-Apr-2026

    Exparte Hearing

    Scc

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    Further Order

    Scc

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    Sr/Ad/Appearence

    Scc

  7. 03-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 84/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case 84/2026 Summary: The court decreed ex-parte in favor of petitioner Pawan Kumar against respondent Kumud Ranjan Pandey for recovery of Rs. 7,500/- loaned on 18/02/2024. The court accepted Kumar's unchallenged testimony supported by a promissory note (Exhibit-2) and found he had proven his case. Pandey must pay the decretal amount within three months or face execution proceedings; additionally, Kumar was penalized Rs. 75/- for failing to file a money lending license under the Bengal Money Lender's Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case