Subramaniam vs M. Rathinamala Advocate - R.Susendhiran — 317/2023
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 27(c). Status: Ex-Parte Evidence. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB130003962023
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
548/2023
Filing Date
04-12-2023
Registration No
317/2023
Registration Date
04-12-2023
Court
District Munsif Court, Pollachi
Judge
1-District Munsif Court, Pollachi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Subramaniam
Adv. R. Balasubramanian
Respondent(s)
M. Rathinamala Advocate - R.Susendhiran
M. Sittrarasu
Adv. R.Susendhiran
M. Tamilselvan
Adv. R.Susendhiran
R. Karpagambigai
Adv. R.Susendhiran
R. Kumaragurubaran
Arukkani
Adv. R.Susendhiran
Gandhimathi
Adv. R.Susendhiran
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif Court, Pollachi
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 25-03-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 02-03-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence | |
| 12-02-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: In Civil Suit No. 317/2023 before the Principal District Civil Court, Pollachi, the court examined the plaintiff's witness (Supraniamyam) on March 10, 2026 under Rule 44 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1969. The witness deposed regarding a sale deed dated June 25, 1989, and various supporting documents (notices, postal acknowledgments, and identity documents) were marked as exhibits. The case was adjourned to allow the defendants' counsel to conduct cross-examination of the witness. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In Civil Suit No. 317/2023 before the Principal District Civil Court, Pollachi, the court examined the plaintiff's witness (Supraniamyam) on March 10, 2026 under Rule 44 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1969. The witness deposed regarding a sale deed dated June 25, 1989, and various supporting documents (notices, postal acknowledgments, and identity documents) were marked as exhibits. The case was adjourned to allow the defendants' counsel to conduct cross-examination of the witness. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts