VELLINGIRI vs ARUCHAMY — 11/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER21RULE11. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 28-Apr-2026 this date has passed

EP - Execution Petition

CNR: TNCB130002692024

e-Filing Number

14-10-2024

Filing Number

410/2024

Filing Date

22-Oct-2024

Registration No

11/2024

Registration Date

22-Oct-2024

Court

District Munsif Court, Pollachi

Judge

1-District Munsif Court, Pollachi

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section ORDER21RULE11

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VELLINGIRI

    Adv. VIKRAM A

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ARUCHAMY

Case History

  1. 28-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  4. 24-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

    Summary: In this civil suit (OS.445/2018) from the Primary District Court, Pallacode, the court rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding a cart track (vandi thatam) on disputed land. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove possession of the cart track as per the 1987 deed and the judgment in case 445/2008, and dismissed the plaintiff's contentions that defendants destroyed the track or violated court orders. The petition was dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  7. 04-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  8. 18-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  9. 10-Feb-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  10. 10-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  11. 04-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  12. 16-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  13. 27-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  14. 18-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  15. 11-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  16. 05-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  17. 29-Oct-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  18. 29-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  19. 25-Oct-2025

    Appearance

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  20. 13-Oct-2025

    Appearance

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  21. 09-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  22. 18-Sep-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  23. 18-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  24. 22-Aug-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  25. 13-Aug-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  26. 17-Jul-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  27. 11-Jul-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  28. 26-Jun-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  29. 16-Jun-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  30. 23-Apr-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  31. 09-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  32. 20-Mar-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  33. 28-Feb-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  34. 21-Jan-2025

    Enquiry

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  35. 20-Dec-2024

    Counter

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  36. 26-Nov-2024

    Counter

    District Munsif Court, Pollachi

  37. 22-Oct-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  38. 22-Oct-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 11/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In this civil suit (OS.445/2018) from the Primary District Court, Pallacode, the court rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding a cart track (vandi thatam) on disputed land. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove possession of the cart track as per the 1987 deed and the judgment in case 445/2008, and dismissed the plaintiff's contentions that defendants destroyed the track or violated court orders. The petition was dismissed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case