Natarajan vs Seetharaman Advocate - Adv S.Justin — 141/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96, Order 41, Rule 1. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

AS - Appeal Suit

CNR: TNKK010013722023

Filing Number

188/2023

Filing Date

16-Feb-2023

Registration No

141/2023

Registration Date

21-Nov-2023

Court

Principal District Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 19-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 96, Order 41, Rule 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Natarajan

    Adv. Adv C.Selvaraj

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Seetharaman Advocate - Adv S.Justin

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The Principal District Court of Kanniyakumari allowed appeals challenging a 2022 judgment that upheld a settlement deed. The court found the settlement deed executed by Santhanammal in favor of her younger son Seetharaman to be invalid due to cumulative suspicious circumstances: the executant was severely ill and died within 30 days, the father (key witness) refused to testify, the deed lacked provisions for the parents' residence, and inconsistencies in witness testimony. The court set aside the settlement deed and granted the plaintiff (Natarajan) a 1/5 share in the property as a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 09-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  8. 05-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  9. 24-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  10. 30-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  11. 18-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  12. 26-Nov-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  13. 17-Oct-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  14. 26-Sep-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  15. 29-Aug-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  16. 28-Jul-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  17. 08-Jul-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  18. 12-Jun-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  19. 20-Mar-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  20. 05-Feb-2025

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  21. 20-Dec-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  22. 25-Oct-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  23. 26-Sep-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  24. 27-Aug-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  25. 06-Aug-2024

    Arguments

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  26. 03-Jul-2024

    Await Records

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  27. 16-Apr-2024

    Await Records

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  28. 12-Feb-2024

    Await Records

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  29. 11-Jan-2024

    Await Records

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  30. 21-Nov-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 16-Feb-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 141/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal District Court of Kanniyakumari allowed appeals challenging a 2022 judgment that upheld a settlement deed. The court found the settlement deed executed by Santhanammal in favor of her younger son Seetharaman to be invalid due to cumulative suspicious circumstances: the executant was severely ill and died within 30 days, the father (key witness) refused to testify, the deed lacked provisions for the parents' residence, and inconsistencies in witness testimony. The court set aside the settlement deed and granted the plaintiff (Natarajan) a 1/5 share in the property as a legal heir under the Hindu Succession Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case