Radha vs Rugmini — 300575/2008

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: Pre trial steps. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

OS - ORIGINAL SUIT

CNR: KLTV430000042008

Pre trial steps

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

Filing Number

575/2008

Filing Date

20-12-2008

Registration No

300575/2008

Registration Date

20-12-2008

Court

Munsiff Court Attingal

Judge

1-MUNSIFF ATTINGAL

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26
Ia/12/2025 Classification : Sanction Petition Section RadhaRugmini

Petitioner(s)

Radha

Adv. K. S. Vinod

Sudhambika

Sheela

Sheeja

Respondent(s)

Rugmini

Suresh Babu

Sathyabhama

Adv. Suseelan.G

Prasad

Adv. Suseelan.G

Hearing History

Judge: 1-MUNSIFF ATTINGAL

19-05-2026

Pre trial steps

04-04-2026

FOR HEARING

26-03-2026

FOR HEARING

24-03-2026

FOR HEARING

19-03-2026

FOR HEARING

Interim Orders

15-02-2018
Order
09-07-2018
Order
16-10-2018
Order
16-10-2018
Order
25-09-2021
Order
25-09-2021
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
31-05-2022
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order
13-01-2025
Order

Court Order Summary Case: IA No. 11/2022 in OS No. 575/2008 | Munsiff Court, Attingal | 13 January 2025 Outcome: The review petition was allowed. The court found an error apparent on the face of the previous order (dated 31-05-2022) that dismissed an application to remit back the commissioner's report and property survey plan. The court determined that filing a remit petition itself constitutes an objection to the report, making the prior dismissal reasoning erroneous. The commissioner's report and plans have been remitted back for fresh inquiry with directions to measure properties according to old and new survey records and subdivision sketches, with additional compensation of Rs. 2,000 to the commissioner and Rs. 1,000 to the surveyor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: IA No. 11/2022 in OS No. 575/2008 | Munsiff Court, Attingal | 13 January 2025 Outcome: The review petition was allowed. The court found an error apparent on the face of the previous order (dated 31-05-2022) that dismissed an application to remit back the commissioner's report and property survey plan. The court determined that filing a remit petition itself constitutes an objection to the report, making the prior dismissal reasoning erroneous. The commissioner's report and plans have been remitted back for fresh inquiry with directions to measure properties according to old and new survey records and subdivision sketches, with additional compensation of Rs. 2,000 to the commissioner and Rs. 1,000 to the surveyor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Munsiff Court Attingal All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case