Padmavathi vs Jegathesh — 174/2022

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 31,27(c). Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNCB130002122022

Part Heard

Next Hearing

28th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

212/2022

Filing Date

18-04-2022

Registration No

174/2022

Registration Date

18-04-2022

Court

District Munsif Court, Pollachi

Judge

2-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MUNSIF, POLLACHI

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 31,27(c)

Petitioner(s)

Padmavathi

Adv. K.Thangarathinam

Respondent(s)

Jegathesh

Hearing History

Judge: 2-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MUNSIF, POLLACHI

07-04-2026

Part Heard

25-03-2026

Part Heard

10-03-2026

Part Heard

03-03-2026

Part Heard

20-02-2026

Orders

Interim Orders

12-10-2022
Chargesheet
12-10-2022
Chargesheet
12-10-2022
Copy of Decree
12-10-2022
Copy of Decree
03-03-2026
Copy of Order

SUMMARY The petition filed under Order XVI Rule 1(2) of CPC to summon revenue officials as witnesses regarding an alleged discrepancy in land patta (property document) No. 2786 has been dismissed without costs. The court found that the petitioner failed to specify which revenue officer to summon, and critically, the alleged patta discrepancy was never pleaded in the original suit, which concerns only the plaintiff's rights over a cart track. Since evidence must relate to pleadings and the petitioner provided no explanation of relevance, the petition was not maintainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY The petition filed under Order XVI Rule 1(2) of CPC to summon revenue officials as witnesses regarding an alleged discrepancy in land patta (property document) No. 2786 has been dismissed without costs. The court found that the petitioner failed to specify which revenue officer to summon, and critically, the alleged patta discrepancy was never pleaded in the original suit, which concerns only the plaintiff's rights over a cart track. Since evidence must relate to pleadings and the petitioner provided no explanation of relevance, the petition was not maintainable. 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

District Munsif Court, Pollachi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case