Kamalam vs Balakrishnan Advocate - Adv K.Sahayadhas — 136/2020

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNKK040002012020

IA Pending

Next Hearing

04th June 2026

Filing Number

266/2020

Filing Date

08-09-2020

Registration No

136/2020

Registration Date

29-09-2020

Court

Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

Judge

8-II Additional District Munsif

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26
Ia/6/2024 Classification : Condonation of Delay Petition Section KamalamBalakrishnan
Ia/7/2024 Classification : Impleading Petition Section KamalamBalakrishnan
Ia/8/2024 Classification : Impleading Petition Section KamalamBalakrishnan
Ia/9/2024 Classification : Petition to Accept Power of Attorney Section KamalamBalakrishnan
Ia/10/2025 Classification : Others Section KamalamBalakrishnan
Ia/11/2025 Classification : Petition to Receive Document Section BalakrishnanKamalam
Ia/12/2026 Classification : 151 Petition Section BalakrishnanKamalam
Ia/13/2026 Classification : Reopen Petition Section BalakrishnanKamalam
Ia/14/2026 Classification : Recall Petition Section BalakrishnanKamalam

Petitioner(s)

Kamalam

Adv. Adv A.Vimalan

Respondent(s)

Balakrishnan Advocate - Adv K.Sahayadhas

Hearing History

Judge: 8-II Additional District Munsif

30-04-2026

IA Pending

24-04-2026

IA Pending

20-04-2026

IA Pending

16-04-2026

Evidence

08-04-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

16-07-2025
Evidence
23-08-2025
Evidence
29-08-2025
Evidence
20-09-2025
Evidence
31-10-2025
Evidence
10-11-2025
Evidence
17-11-2025
Evidence
27-11-2025
Evidence
21-01-2026
Evidence
06-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary: The petition filed by the defendant (Balakrishnan) seeking permission to summon witnesses from the Village Administrative Office and Tahsildar's office to prove authenticity of documents in a permanent injunction suit was dismissed. The court found that the Tahsildar had already been examined as PW2 with relevant documents marked as exhibits, the required documents were original and properly issued by competent revenue authorities, and the petitioner failed to specify the exact witnesses needed, making the petition unnecessary for just adjudication of the suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The petition filed by the defendant (Balakrishnan) seeking permission to summon witnesses from the Village Administrative Office and Tahsildar's office to prove authenticity of documents in a permanent injunction suit was dismissed. The court found that the Tahsildar had already been examined as PW2 with relevant documents marked as exhibits, the required documents were original and properly issued by competent revenue authorities, and the petitioner failed to specify the exact witnesses needed, making the petition unnecessary for just adjudication of the suit. 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

Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case