Perumalammal vs Poongodi Advocate - S.K.Sivakumar — 101/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U.sec27(c). Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.

Arguments Next hearing 28-Apr-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNED060001082024

Filing Number

129/2024

Filing Date

05-Aug-2024

Registration No

101/2024

Registration Date

05-Aug-2024

Court

District Munsif Court, Sathyamangalam

Judge

2-District Munsif

Last updated 27-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section U.sec27(c)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Perumalammal

    Adv. S.K.Sivakumar

  2. 2.kuppusamy

    Adv. S.K. Sivakumar

  3. 3.Arappuliyammal

    Adv. S.K.Sivakumar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Poongodi Advocate - S.K.Sivakumar

  2. 2.S. Ananthan

  3. 3.District Collector, Erode District for the Government of Tamil Nadu

  4. 4.The Tasildhar, Sathyamangalam

Case History

  1. 28-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  5. 02-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  6. 24-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  7. 17-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  9. 03-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Munsif

  10. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  11. 17-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  12. 06-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  13. 30-Jan-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

    Case Summary In Original Suit No. 101/2024 before the District Munsif Court, Sathy (Erode District), the court recorded the examination-in-chief of Witness 2 on January 30, 2026. The witness (defendant Krishnayathgari, age 56) testified regarding a property dispute, stating he had limited knowledge of survey numbers and other details of the properties in question. The case proceedings continue with cross-examination of the first defendant scheduled next. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  14. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  15. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  16. 09-Jan-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  17. 09-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  18. 12-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  19. 03-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  20. 26-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  21. 14-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  22. 04-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  23. 27-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  24. 13-Oct-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  25. 13-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    District Munsif

  26. 12-Sep-2025

    Trial

    District Munsif

  27. 22-Aug-2025

    Trial

    District Munsif

  28. 02-Aug-2025

    Trial

    District Munsif

  29. 21-Jul-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif

  30. 18-Jun-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif

  31. 09-Jun-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif

  32. 02-Jun-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif

  33. 19-Mar-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif

  34. 26-Feb-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif

  35. 10-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif

  36. 09-Dec-2024

    Written Statement

    District Munsif

  37. 15-Nov-2024

    Written Statement

    District Munsif

  38. 16-Oct-2024

    Issues

    District Munsif

  39. 21-Sep-2024

    Issues

    District Munsif

  40. 13-Sep-2024

    Service Pending-Summon

    District Munsif

  41. 05-Sep-2024

    Service Pending-Summon

    District Munsif

  42. 05-Aug-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  43. 05-Aug-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 101/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary In Original Suit No. 101/2024 before the District Munsif Court, Sathy (Erode District), the court recorded the examination-in-chief of Witness 2 on January 30, 2026. The witness (defendant Krishnayathgari, age 56) testified regarding a property dispute, stating he had limited knowledge of survey numbers and other details of the properties in question. The case proceedings continue with cross-examination of the first defendant scheduled next. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case