Karthik Suryaraj vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Tamilnadu Water Resource Department — 15/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26, order VII, Rule 1. Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.

IA Pending Next hearing 03-Jun-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNKK040003062024

Filing Number

382/2024

Filing Date

13-Dec-2024

Registration No

15/2025

Registration Date

31-Jan-2025

Court

Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari

Judge

8-II Additional District Munsif

Last updated 19-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26, order VII, Rule 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Karthik Suryaraj

    Adv. Adv A.Lawrence Peter Shaw

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Tamilnadu Water Resource Department

  2. 2.State of Tamilnadu Rep.by The District Collector,

  3. 3.J. Jayakumar

Case History

  1. 03-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 20-Apr-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  3. 02-Apr-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  4. 01-Apr-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  7. 27-Feb-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  8. 13-Feb-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  9. 02-Feb-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  10. 27-Jan-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  11. 23-Jan-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  12. 06-Jan-2026

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  13. 12-Dec-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  14. 21-Nov-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  15. 04-Nov-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  16. 25-Oct-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  17. 14-Oct-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  18. 09-Oct-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  19. 25-Sep-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  20. 15-Sep-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  21. 04-Sep-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  22. 25-Aug-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Summary: The II Additional District Munsif Court, Nagercoil allowed the petition (I.A. No. 3 of 2025) and appointed Advocate Selvi X. Minisha as Advocate Commissioner to inspect the plaintiff's property and submit a detailed report within two months, with remuneration fixed at Rs. 8,000. The court found that an Advocate Commissioner's appointment was necessary for just and effective adjudication regarding the disputed compound wall allegedly encroached upon by the Water Resources Department. The case involves a property dispute concerning an irrigation canal encroachment marking on the plaintiff's compound wall. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  23. 25-Aug-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  24. 21-Aug-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  25. 12-Aug-2025

    Trial

    II Additional District Munsif

  26. 11-Aug-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  27. 05-Aug-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  28. 01-Aug-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  29. 26-Jul-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  30. 23-Jul-2025

    IA Pending

    II Additional District Munsif

  31. 11-Jul-2025

    Issue of Service

    Principal District Munsif

  32. 03-Jun-2025

    Issue of Service

    Principal District Munsif

  33. 03-Mar-2025

    Issue of Service

    Principal District Munsif

  34. 31-Jan-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  35. 13-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 15/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The II Additional District Munsif Court, Nagercoil allowed the petition (I.A. No. 3 of 2025) and appointed Advocate Selvi X. Minisha as Advocate Commissioner to inspect the plaintiff's property and submit a detailed report within two months, with remuneration fixed at Rs. 8,000. The court found that an Advocate Commissioner's appointment was necessary for just and effective adjudication regarding the disputed compound wall allegedly encroached upon by the Water Resources Department. The case involves a property dispute concerning an irrigation canal encroachment marking on the plaintiff's compound wall. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case