Dhayalan vs Govindarajulu — 15/2018

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 43. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 21st April 2026.

CMA - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal

CNR: TNCG130004912018

Case disposed

Filing Number

1100015/2018

Filing Date

28-11-2018

Registration No

15/2018

Registration Date

28-11-2018

Court

Sub Court, Maduranthakam

Judge

1-Subordinate Judge

Decision Date

21st April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 43

Petitioner(s)

Dhayalan

Adv. S.Subramanian, S.Suresh, A.Abdul Hayath

Sharmila

Respondent(s)

Govindarajulu

Kala represented by her agent Andal

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge

21-04-2026

Disposed

27-03-2026

Orders

16-03-2026

Orders

23-02-2026

Orders

16-02-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

21-04-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: CMA 15/2018 The appellate court reversed the trial court's temporary injunction order, finding that Govindarajulu (the plaintiff/respondent) failed to prove actual possession of the disputed property or establish a prima facie case. Although Govindarajulu produced title documents including a 1978 settlement deed and a 2012 sale deed, the court held these were insufficient—possession must be evidenced by documents like adangal extracts and tax receipts in the claimant's name, which he never provided. The court dismissed the temporary injunction application entirely. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

08-08-2024
Copy of Order
08-08-2024
Copy of Decree
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CMA 15/2018 The appellate court reversed the trial court's temporary injunction order, finding that Govindarajulu (the plaintiff/respondent) failed to prove actual possession of the disputed property or establish a prima facie case. Although Govindarajulu produced title documents including a 1978 settlement deed and a 2012 sale deed, the court held these were insufficient—possession must be evidenced by documents like adangal extracts and tax receipts in the claimant's name, which he never provided. The court dismissed the temporary injunction application entirely. 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