Thirupathi vs Abdul Majid Advocate - BABU.M — 226/2021
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section Or7R1to6. Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKI010011812021
Next Hearing
06th June 2026
Filing Number
310/2021
Filing Date
26-04-2021
Registration No
226/2021
Registration Date
24-09-2021
Court
Principal District Court, Krishnagiri
Judge
1-Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Thirupathi
Adv. VENKATASAMY.R
Respondent(s)
Abdul Majid Advocate - BABU.M
Abdul Wajid
Adv. BABU.M
Abdul Zuber
Adv. BABU.M
Umar Khan
Adv. BABU.M
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | IA Pending |
| 15-04-2026 | IA Pending |
| 12-03-2026 | IA Pending |
| 19-02-2026 | IA Pending |
| 23-01-2026 | IA Pending |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: OS 226/2021 - Thirupathi v. Abdul Majid Advocate & Others Dated: 30.01.2025 This is a cross-examination of witness PW.2 (Sujatha) in a property sale dispute. The witness testified regarding a purchase agreement allegedly involving defendants Majid, Wajid, Zuber, and Umar Khan. Key contentions: the witness denied that Salma (another party) signed the agreement document (VA.SA.A.3), claiming she was absent when executed. The court record focuses on testimony regarding a ₹10 lakh property purchase with ₹9.5 lakh paid as advance on 26.05.2020, and contradictions about payment details and document authenticity. The witness's credibility regarding inheritance claims and document execution was extensively tested through cross-examination. Status: Case adjourned with witness cross-examination concluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OS 226/2021 - Thirupathi v. Abdul Majid Advocate & Others Dated: 30.01.2025 This is a cross-examination of witness PW.2 (Sujatha) in a property sale dispute. The witness testified regarding a purchase agreement allegedly involving defendants Majid, Wajid, Zuber, and Umar Khan. Key contentions: the witness denied that Salma (another party) signed the agreement document (VA.SA.A.3), claiming she was absent when executed. The court record focuses on testimony regarding a ₹10 lakh property purchase with ₹9.5 lakh paid as advance on 26.05.2020, and contradictions about payment details and document authenticity. The witness's credibility regarding inheritance claims and document execution was extensively tested through cross-examination. Status: Case adjourned with witness cross-examination concluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts