E.J.DAVIS vs SALIK — 69/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or 7 R 1. Status: IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNDG110013512025
Filing Number
79/2025
Filing Date
12-Aug-2025
Registration No
69/2025
Registration Date
12-Aug-2025
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I Court, Kodaikanal
Judge
1-District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
Last updated 17-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.E.J.DAVIS
Adv. N.RAMACHANDRAN
Respondent(s)
-
1.SALIK
Case History
-
18-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
21-Apr-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
17-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
17-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
Case Summary: E.J. Davis v. Salik (OS 69/2025) The District Munsif Court, Kodaikanal dismissed E.J. Davis's interim injunction petition on 17 March 2026. Davis sought to restrain adjacent landowner Salik from construction involving deep excavation, claiming it damaged his 50-year-old compound wall and threatened his Hotel Cooker's Tower structure. The court held that Davis failed to establish the three-part test for interim relief: prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience. Since an advocate commissioner could not determine the exact cause of damages, and Salik had obtained proper permits, the court found the balance favored Salik and declined to order work cessation at this interim stage, leaving substantive issues for trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Mar-2026
Orders
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
05-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
04-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
03-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
02-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
26-Feb-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
25-Feb-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
20-Jan-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
19-Dec-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
09-Dec-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
09-Dec-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
09-Dec-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
27-Nov-2025
Orders
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
21-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
06-Oct-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
12-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
26-Aug-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate
-
12-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 69/2025
Case Summary: E.J. Davis v. Salik (OS 69/2025) The District Munsif Court, Kodaikanal dismissed E.J. Davis's interim injunction petition on 17 March 2026. Davis sought to restrain adjacent landowner Salik from construction involving deep excavation, claiming it damaged his 50-year-old compound wall and threatened his Hotel Cooker's Tower structure. The court held that Davis failed to establish the three-part test for interim relief: prima facie case, irreparable injury, and balance of convenience. Since an advocate commissioner could not determine the exact cause of damages, and Salik had obtained proper permits, the court found the balance favored Salik and declined to order work cessation at this interim stage, leaving substantive issues for trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts