P.Palaniammal and 3 others vs M.Palanisamy and 3 others — 157/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 37(2). Status: Additional Written Statement. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNED050003572022
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
378/2022
Filing Date
28-07-2022
Registration No
157/2022
Registration Date
28-07-2022
Court
Sub Court, Sathyamangalam
Judge
1-Subordinate Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
P.Palaniammal and 3 others
Adv. P.Thatchinamurthy
A.Valliammal
V.Selvi
E.Rasathi
Respondent(s)
M.Palanisamy and 3 others
P.Saravanakumar
V.Suseela
V.Pushpalatha
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge
Additional Written Statement
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Additional Written Statement | |
| 02-02-2026 | Issues | |
| 19-01-2026 | Issues | |
| 12-01-2026 | Issues | |
| 03-12-2025 | Issues |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: I.A.No.3/2023 in O.S.No.157 of 2022 | Subordinate Court, Sathyamangalam | Date: 17 November 2025 Outcome: Petition ALLOWED. The court ordered the impleadment of proposed respondents 5 and 6 (Kanagaraj and Rangasamy) as necessary parties to the main partition suit under Order I Rule 10 CPC. The plaintiffs challenged property alienations made during the dispute, and the court found that respondents 5 and 6, who claim derivative title through registered sale deeds, must participate to enable effective and complete adjudication and avoid multiplicity of litigation. The plaint shall be amended accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: I.A.No.3/2023 in O.S.No.157 of 2022 | Subordinate Court, Sathyamangalam | Date: 17 November 2025 Outcome: Petition ALLOWED. The court ordered the impleadment of proposed respondents 5 and 6 (Kanagaraj and Rangasamy) as necessary parties to the main partition suit under Order I Rule 10 CPC. The plaintiffs challenged property alienations made during the dispute, and the court found that respondents 5 and 6, who claim derivative title through registered sale deeds, must participate to enable effective and complete adjudication and avoid multiplicity of litigation. The plaint shall be amended accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts