K.N. Baskaran vs M.Sathiyaraj Advocate - G.Sureshbabu — 200274/2012

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(d),27(c). Status: Stay. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit (Title)

CNR: TNCG140000022011

Stay

Next Hearing

19th June 2026

Filing Number

200274/2012

Filing Date

12-10-2011

Registration No

200274/2012

Registration Date

12-10-2012

Court

District Munsif Court, Maduranthakam

Judge

2-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(d),27(c)

Petitioner(s)

K.N. Baskaran

Adv. G.V.Sridaran

Respondent(s)

M.Sathiyaraj Advocate - G.Sureshbabu

Hearing History

Judge: 2-District Munsif

30-04-2026

Stay

16-04-2026

Stay

30-03-2026

Stay

16-03-2026

Stay

18-02-2026

Stay

Interim Orders

06-07-2022
Copy of Order
06-07-2022
Copy of Order
31-10-2022
Copy of Order
31-10-2022
Copy of Order
03-06-2023
Copy of Order
04-09-2025
Copy of Order

Case Summary: O.S.No.274/2012 The District Munsif Court at Madurantakam dismissed three interim applications (I.A.Nos.12/2025, 13/2025, 14/2025) filed by plaintiff K.N. Baskaran at the arguments stage of his suit seeking to declare a 2010 sale deed null and void. The court found the petitions devoid of merit, noting the plaintiff had already received two prior opportunities to submit additional documents and had sufficient time to mark evidence, yet failed to provide justification for late filing. The court concluded these petitions were merely intended to prolong proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S.No.274/2012 The District Munsif Court at Madurantakam dismissed three interim applications (I.A.Nos.12/2025, 13/2025, 14/2025) filed by plaintiff K.N. Baskaran at the arguments stage of his suit seeking to declare a 2010 sale deed null and void. The court found the petitions devoid of merit, noting the plaintiff had already received two prior opportunities to submit additional documents and had sufficient time to mark evidence, yet failed to provide justification for late filing. The court concluded these petitions were merely intended to prolong proceedings. 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

District Munsif Court, Maduranthakam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case