Chinnasamy and 4 Others vs Kirishnana @ Ramakirishnan and 2 Others Advocate - T.Elengo — 10/2020

Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section O 41, R 1. Status: Stay. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

AS - Appeal Suit

CNR: TNDG070002182020

Stay

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

237/2020

Filing Date

20-02-2020

Registration No

10/2020

Registration Date

24-02-2020

Court

Sub Court, Palani

Judge

2-Additional Sub Judge

Acts & Sections

COURT FEES ACT, 1870 Section O 41, R 1
IA/1/2022 Classification : AS Section Chinnasamy and 4 OthersKirishnana @ Ramakirishnan and 2 Others

Petitioner(s)

Chinnasamy and 4 Others

Adv. Eteeshwaran

Respondent(s)

Kirishnana @ Ramakirishnan and 2 Others Advocate - T.Elengo

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Additional Sub Judge

12-03-2026

Stay

06-02-2026

CRP Pending

12-01-2026

CRP Pending

12-12-2025

CRP Pending

20-11-2025

CRP Pending

Interim Orders

02-02-2023
Copy of Judgment

Summary The petition filed by five appellants under Rule 75 of the Civil Rules of Practice to summon revenue records (patta transfer files) from the Taluk Office, Palani, and mark them as additional evidence in their appeal was dismissed. The court found the petition devoid of merits because the petitioners failed to explain why they hadn't sought these documents during the trial, establish the necessity and relevancy of the documents, or demonstrate that they were unaware of them or unable to produce them despite due diligence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The petition filed by five appellants under Rule 75 of the Civil Rules of Practice to summon revenue records (patta transfer files) from the Taluk Office, Palani, and mark them as additional evidence in their appeal was dismissed. The court found the petition devoid of merits because the petitioners failed to explain why they hadn't sought these documents during the trial, establish the necessity and relevancy of the documents, or demonstrate that they were unaware of them or unable to produce them despite due diligence. 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, Palani All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case