Murugan vs Manickam Advocate - JAYABALAN.M — 100019/2018

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 7R1and26. Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNKI070001412018

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Next Hearing

02nd June 2026

Filing Number

100023/2018

Filing Date

21-03-2018

Registration No

100019/2018

Registration Date

21-03-2018

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Pochampalli

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pochampalli

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 7R1and26

Petitioner(s)

Murugan

Adv. MANICKA PRABU.S.R

Respondent(s)

Manickam Advocate - JAYABALAN.M

Selvam

Adv. JAYABALAN.M

Dharmarajan

Markandan

Adv. JAYABALAN.M

Palani

Ravi

Adv. JAYABALAN.M

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pochampalli

27-04-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

12-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

16-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

18-12-2025

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

18-11-2025

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Interim Orders

20-08-2020
Copy of Decree/Decretal Order

Case Summary: 100019/2018 Outcome: Petition allowed with partial relief granted. The District Court of Chengalpattu allowed the petition filed by Murugan against respondents Manickam Advocate Jayabalan and others. The court ordered the disputed property to be divided into 12 equal shares, with one share allocated to the petitioner. Additionally, the court set aside two previous orders dated 26.09.2016 (Case Nos. 1210/2016, 1211/2016, and 1212/2016) and directed respondents to pay the petitioner ₹7,860 in costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 100019/2018 Outcome: Petition allowed with partial relief granted. The District Court of Chengalpattu allowed the petition filed by Murugan against respondents Manickam Advocate Jayabalan and others. The court ordered the disputed property to be divided into 12 equal shares, with one share allocated to the petitioner. Additionally, the court set aside two previous orders dated 26.09.2016 (Case Nos. 1210/2016, 1211/2016, and 1212/2016) and directed respondents to pay the petitioner ₹7,860 in costs. 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

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Pochampalli All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case