D.Anburaja vs Karunagaran — 14/2026

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section OR 7 R 1. Status: Appearance. Next hearing: 07th July 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNCG130000552026

Appearance

Next Hearing

07th July 2026

Filing Number

53/2026

Filing Date

09-01-2026

Registration No

14/2026

Registration Date

03-02-2026

Court

Sub Court, Maduranthakam

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section OR 7 R 1

Petitioner(s)

D.Anburaja

Adv. Subramanian.S.

Respondent(s)

Karunagaran

Ponnammal

Marimuthu

Selvam

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge

07-04-2026

Appearance

24-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

18-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

16-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

13-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Interim Orders

07-04-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: D. Anburaja v. Karunagaran & Others (O.S. No. 14/2026) Petitioner D. Anburaja sought temporary injunction to restrain defendants from constructing on ancestral property, claiming he purchased a 1/3 share through a prior court decree. Defendants countered that the property belonged to six co-owners and that the petitioner's vendor had relinquished her share to them in 1995. The court dismissed the temporary injunction application, finding the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case, as he could only claim a co-owner's share—not exclusive title to the middle portion as claimed—and no document proved exclusive possession. Accordingly, injunction cannot be granted against co-owners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: D. Anburaja v. Karunagaran & Others (O.S. No. 14/2026) Petitioner D. Anburaja sought temporary injunction to restrain defendants from constructing on ancestral property, claiming he purchased a 1/3 share through a prior court decree. Defendants countered that the property belonged to six co-owners and that the petitioner's vendor had relinquished her share to them in 1995. The court dismissed the temporary injunction application, finding the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case, as he could only claim a co-owner's share—not exclusive title to the middle portion as claimed—and no document proved exclusive possession. Accordingly, injunction cannot be granted against co-owners. 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

Sub Court, Maduranthakam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case