A. Muthukumarasamy vs GTL Infrastructure Limited, Navi Mumbai Advocate - Mr.S.S.Ragunath — 70/2021
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 22,27(c). Disposed: Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree on 10th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB110002212021
Filing Number
216/2021
Filing Date
04-Mar-2021
Registration No
70/2021
Registration Date
08-Apr-2021
Court
Sub Court, Pollachi
Judge
1-Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
Decision Date
10-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree
Last updated 26-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.A. Muthukumarasamy
Adv. Mr. S. Suresh
-
2.M. Alagu Sadhasivam
Adv. Mr. S.Suresh
Respondent(s)
-
1.GTL Infrastructure Limited, Navi Mumbai Advocate - Mr.S.S.Ragunath
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of DecreeView PDF
The Subordinate Judge of Pollachi granted the plaintiffs' suit against GTL Infrastructure Limited, directing the defendant to deliver vacant possession of the property, pay Rs. 4,69,854 with interest (9% till decree, then 6%), and remove the cellphone tower within three months or face removal by the plaintiff. The defendant was also ordered to pay Rs. 24,407 in costs and the plaintiffs were entitled to damages and create a charge over the tower equipment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
10-Mar-2026
Disposed
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
09-Mar-2026
Judgement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
25-Feb-2026
Judgement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
11-Feb-2026
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
04-Feb-2026
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
21-Jan-2026
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
10-Dec-2025
Reopen
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
26-Nov-2025
Reopen
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
19-Nov-2025
Reopen
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
10-Nov-2025
Reopen
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
28-Oct-2025
Reopen
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
15-Oct-2025
Judgement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
17-Sep-2025
Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
20-Aug-2025
Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
30-Jul-2025
Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
09-Jul-2025
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
09-Jul-2025
Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
02-Jul-2025
Trial
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
25-Jun-2025
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
11-Jun-2025
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
28-Apr-2025
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
14-Mar-2025
For further Proceedings
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
16-Nov-2024
Trial
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
15-Jun-2024
Trial
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
02-Mar-2024
Trial
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
08-Nov-2023
Trial
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
03-Oct-2023
IA Pending
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
31-Aug-2023
IA Pending
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
26-Jul-2023
IA Pending
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
01-Jul-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
14-Jun-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
05-Apr-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
15-Mar-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
18-Feb-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
25-Jan-2023
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
21-Dec-2022
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
04-Jul-2022
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
28-Mar-2022
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
17-Jan-2022
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
15-Nov-2021
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
05-Oct-2021
Written Statement
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
01-Jul-2021
Service Pending
Sub-Ordinate Judge, Pollachi
-
08-Apr-2021
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Mar-2021
Case filed
Registration No. 70/2021
The Subordinate Judge of Pollachi granted the plaintiffs' suit against GTL Infrastructure Limited, directing the defendant to deliver vacant possession of the property, pay Rs. 4,69,854 with interest (9% till decree, then 6%), and remove the cellphone tower within three months or face removal by the plaintiff. The defendant was also ordered to pay Rs. 24,407 in costs and the plaintiffs were entitled to damages and create a charge over the tower equipment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts