Pappathi vs Rajappan Advocate - Manivasagam.K — 92/2020
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section VII. Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNCB190002692020
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
334/2020
Filing Date
25-09-2020
Registration No
92/2020
Registration Date
25-09-2020
Court
Sub Court, Mettupalayam
Judge
2-Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Pappathi
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Santhi
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Baby
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Kumar
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Selvi
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Bujjammal
Adv. R.Muthukumar
Respondent(s)
Rajappan Advocate - Manivasagam.K
Lavakusha
Adv. Exparte
Mathaiyan
Adv. Sathish.K
K.R.Senthilkumar
Adv. Rajendran.P
R.Sanjeevkumar
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 01-04-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 23-03-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 18-03-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Interim Orders
This is a deposition of witness (DW.2) recorded on 15.04.2026 in civil suit O.S.92/2020 before the Court of Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam. The witness testified under oath regarding a property dispute involving a mortgage deed and loan document dated 04.02.1966, providing detailed evidence about the transaction and the parties' involvement. The cross-examination of the witness by both the plaintiff's and defendant's counsel was recorded, with the judge noting that the transcript was read back to the witness for verification and confirmation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a deposition of witness (DW.2) recorded on 15.04.2026 in civil suit O.S.92/2020 before the Court of Subordinate Judge, Mettupalayam. The witness testified under oath regarding a property dispute involving a mortgage deed and loan document dated 04.02.1966, providing detailed evidence about the transaction and the parties' involvement. The cross-examination of the witness by both the plaintiff's and defendant's counsel was recorded, with the judge noting that the transcript was read back to the witness for verification and confirmation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts