Angamuthu vs The District Collector Advocate - Mahendran.S — 118/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(d). Disposed: Contested--Decreed without cost on 12th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB170001252025
Filing Number
125/2025
Filing Date
02-09-2025
Registration No
118/2025
Registration Date
07-10-2025
Court
District Munsif Court, Sulur
Judge
30-DISTRICT MUNSIF, SULUR
Decision Date
12th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed without cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Angamuthu
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Andavan
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Angathal
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Suppathal
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Vijaya
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Angathal
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Sarojini
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Suresh
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Sivaraj
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Gopalan
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Jaya
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Selvi
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Kittathal
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Selvaraj
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Indrani
Adv. BABY CHITRA T,BABY CHITRA T
Hemavathi
Adv. BABY CHITRA T
Respondent(s)
The District Collector Advocate - Mahendran.S
The Tahsildar
Adv. Mahendran.S
Hearing History
Judge: 30-DISTRICT MUNSIF, SULUR
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-06-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-06-2026 | Judgement |
| 10-06-2026 | Judgement |
| 08-06-2026 | Judgement |
| 04-06-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
This document is a witness deposition record from Case 118/2025 in the District Munsif Court of Sulur, not a final judgment. The witness testifies that the petitioner filed suit for a succession certificate regarding a person named Thimman who died approximately 25 years ago. The witness clarifies he is not a relative of the petitioner but from the same area, and cautions against giving biased testimony merely due to acquaintance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a witness deposition record from Case 118/2025 in the District Munsif Court of Sulur, not a final judgment. The witness testifies that the petitioner filed suit for a succession certificate regarding a person named Thimman who died approximately 25 years ago. The witness clarifies he is not a relative of the petitioner but from the same area, and cautions against giving biased testimony merely due to acquaintance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts