PADMA RAMAMURTHI D M Legal Ventures vs SUNDARAM RAMAMURTI — TP/2291/2026

Case under Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 278. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM020044822026

e-Filing Number

06-02-2026

Filing Number

TP/4482/2026

Filing Date

06-Feb-2026

Registration No

TP/2291/2026

Registration Date

22-Apr-2026

Judge

Shri. D. D. Suryavanshi, Officer On Special Duty With Testamentary Department

Coram

Shri. D. D. Suryavanshi, Officer On Special Duty With Testamentary Department

Bench Type

Single

Category

TESTAMENTARY ( 63 )

Sub-Category

Letters of Administration without Will ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Succession Act, 1925 Section 278

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PADMA RAMAMURTHI D M Legal Ventures

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUNDARAM RAMAMURTI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 07-May-2026

    Shri. D. D. Suryavanshi, Officer On Special Duty With Testamentary DepartmentView PDF

    Case Summary: TP/2291/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned to 18.08.2026. The court issued directions requiring the petitioner (D M Legal Ventures) to issue citation within two weeks, submit required documents per Rule 396, notify non-consenting legal heirs, comply with Chapter XXVI of BHC Rules, furnish an administration bond for the gross amount per Rule 420, and serve notices on all legal heirs. The court also directed verification of any cross-petitions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    For Direction

    Shri. D. D. Suryavanshi, Officer On Special Duty With Testamentary Department

  4. 06-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. TP/2291/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: TP/2291/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned to 18.08.2026. The court issued directions requiring the petitioner (D M Legal Ventures) to issue citation within two weeks, submit required documents per Rule 396, notify non-consenting legal heirs, comply with Chapter XXVI of BHC Rules, furnish an administration bond for the gross amount per Rule 420, and serve notices on all legal heirs. The court also directed verification of any cross-petitions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case