Mumtaj vs Mohamed Hanifa Advocate - Adv Chenthil Athiban — 147/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26,OrderVII,Rule1,3. Disposed: Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat on 14th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKK040002022025
Filing Number
237/2025
Filing Date
15-Sep-2025
Registration No
147/2025
Registration Date
15-Oct-2025
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari
Judge
6-Principal District Munsif
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Settled through Lok Adalat
Last updated 19-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Mumtaj
Adv. Adv SA.Kanagasabapathi
-
2.Mrs. M. Zaanath Beevi
Respondent(s)
-
1.Mohamed Hanifa Advocate - Adv Chenthil Athiban
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
The Lok Adalat (pre-litigation settlement) between plaintiff Zeerath Begum and defendant Mohamed Hanifa amicably settled a property dispute on 14 March 2024 at Nagercoil. The settlement terms agreed that both parties would sell the disputed properties and mutually divide the sale proceeds, with neither party claiming further interest in the other's scheduled property. The case was disposed as settled without coercion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal District Munsif
-
11-Mar-2026
IA Pending
Principal District Munsif
-
10-Mar-2026
IA Pending
Principal District Munsif
-
10-Feb-2026
IA Pending
Principal District Munsif
-
19-Jan-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Munsif
-
17-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Munsif
-
15-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Sep-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 147/2025
The Lok Adalat (pre-litigation settlement) between plaintiff Zeerath Begum and defendant Mohamed Hanifa amicably settled a property dispute on 14 March 2024 at Nagercoil. The settlement terms agreed that both parties would sell the disputed properties and mutually divide the sale proceeds, with neither party claiming further interest in the other's scheduled property. The case was disposed as settled without coercion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts