K.K.M.Selvaraj vs Saravanan Alias Umanandhan — 1043/2025
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 26,. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB010129502024
Next Hearing
06th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
5588/2024
Filing Date
06-12-2024
Registration No
1043/2025
Registration Date
29-08-2025
Court
Principal District Court, Coimbatore
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K.K.M.Selvaraj
Adv. Krishnasamy.M
Respondent(s)
Saravanan Alias Umanandhan
Muthusamy Gounder Ninaivu Trust Rep by its M.Dhanapal
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge
Trial
Trial
Written Statement
Written Statement
Written Statement
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | Trial | |
| 10-03-2026 | Trial | |
| 25-02-2026 | Written Statement | |
| 22-01-2026 | Written Statement | |
| 10-12-2025 | Written Statement |
Interim Orders
Summary: In this civil case before the Principal District Court of Coimbatore (T.O.S. No. 1043/2025), the court recorded the examination-in-chief of the plaintiff (PW-1) on April 9, 2026. The plaintiff testified regarding a property sale agreement dated November 18, 2024, and disputes over trust deeds and property ownership involving two defendants. Both defendants were cross-examined; the first defendant denied authorizing the sale and claimed no permission to use the property for the second defendant's trust, while the second defendant's trustee similarly denied authorization. The court found no further cross-examination was required and the matter appears to proceed toward adjudication on the merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In this civil case before the Principal District Court of Coimbatore (T.O.S. No. 1043/2025), the court recorded the examination-in-chief of the plaintiff (PW-1) on April 9, 2026. The plaintiff testified regarding a property sale agreement dated November 18, 2024, and disputes over trust deeds and property ownership involving two defendants. Both defendants were cross-examined; the first defendant denied authorizing the sale and claimed no permission to use the property for the second defendant's trust, while the second defendant's trustee similarly denied authorization. The court found no further cross-examination was required and the matter appears to proceed toward adjudication on the merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts