Pounammal vs Chinnakuzhandhai and others Advocate - G.G.Manikandan — 100166/2014

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 37(2). Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit (Title)

CNR: TNCG130004872014

IA Pending

Next Hearing

25th June 2026

Filing Number

1000166/2014

Filing Date

02-12-2014

Registration No

100166/2014

Registration Date

02-12-2014

Court

Sub Court, Maduranthakam

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 37(2)

Petitioner(s)

Pounammal

Adv. R. Arumugam

Respondent(s)

Chinnakuzhandhai and others Advocate - G.G.Manikandan

chinnakuzhanthai

Siva

Govindammal

Anjalakshi

Srinivasan

mohana

Arnachalam

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge

12-06-2026

IA Pending

05-06-2026

IA Pending

30-04-2026

IA Pending

28-04-2026

IA Pending

21-04-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

09-02-2026
Copy of Order
09-03-2026
Copy of Deposition

Case Summary: OS No. 166/2014 Court: Subordinate Court, Maduranthakam Date: 09.03.2026 Witnesses 1-6 were examined and cross-examined. The court heard testimony regarding property disputes and family succession matters involving a 1970 partition agreement and a 2012 death. The court found insufficient evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims regarding the partition and succession documents, noting no proper signatures or acknowledgment of the disputed 1970 deed. The suit was dismissed due to lack of credible documentary evidence and witness testimony establishing the petitioner's entitlement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: OS No. 166/2014 Court: Subordinate Court, Maduranthakam Date: 09.03.2026 Witnesses 1-6 were examined and cross-examined. The court heard testimony regarding property disputes and family succession matters involving a 1970 partition agreement and a 2012 death. The court found insufficient evidence supporting the plaintiff's claims regarding the partition and succession documents, noting no proper signatures or acknowledgment of the disputed 1970 deed. The suit was dismissed due to lack of credible documentary evidence and witness testimony establishing the petitioner's entitlement. 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