kunjamma vs sanadanan Advocate - Jayakrishnan — 200074/2013
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2671. Status: For Defendent Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd May 2026.
OS - ORIGINAL SUIT
CNR: KLAL110000572013
Next Hearing
23rd May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
202939/2013
Filing Date
11-02-2013
Registration No
200074/2013
Registration Date
11-02-2013
Court
Munsiff Court, Cherthala
Judge
2-Additional Munsiff, Cherthala
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
kunjamma
Adv. K R Suresh
krishnan
Padmanabhan
surendran
vijayan
chandrika
dayanandan
Respondent(s)
sanadanan Advocate - Jayakrishnan
kunjumani
maheswari
manohari
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Additional Munsiff, Cherthala
For Defendent Evidence
For Defendent Evidence
For return of summons
For cross examination.
Call on
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-04-2026 | For Defendent Evidence | |
| 24-03-2026 | For Defendent Evidence | |
| 11-03-2026 | For return of summons | |
| 09-03-2026 | For cross examination. | |
| 17-01-2026 | Call on |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The petition filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a new commissioner to conduct local investigation and prepare a comprehensive plan of the plaint schedule properties has been dismissed. The court found that an earlier survey commission report already contains sufficient findings regarding the disputed B schedule pathway, and the extent of the C schedule property (servient tenement) is not a matter in dispute in this easement rights suit, making a fresh commission unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The petition filed under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC for appointment of a new commissioner to conduct local investigation and prepare a comprehensive plan of the plaint schedule properties has been dismissed. The court found that an earlier survey commission report already contains sufficient findings regarding the disputed B schedule pathway, and the extent of the C schedule property (servient tenement) is not a matter in dispute in this easement rights suit, making a fresh commission unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts