Tmt. Sivagami and another vs Tmt. Vasantha Ammal and 02 Others Advocate - Adv A.Maria Stephen — 266/2014
Case under --- Section 1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed with cost on 11th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNKK040006192014
Filing Number
321/2014
Filing Date
16-10-2014
Registration No
266/2014
Registration Date
16-10-2014
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari
Judge
7-I Additional District Munsif
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed with cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Tmt. Sivagami and another
Adv. Adv A.Lawrence Peter Shaw
Respondent(s)
Tmt. Vasantha Ammal and 02 Others Advocate - Adv A.Maria Stephen
Hearing History
Judge: 7-I Additional District Munsif
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 07-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 05-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court decreed the suit filed by plaintiffs Sivagami and S.M. Sathasivam, holding that the 1st defendant's unilateral cancellation of their 2009 settlement deed was void and impermissible under Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act. The court also declared the subsequent 2014 settlement deed and power of attorney executed by defendants 2-4 as null and void, granting the plaintiffs permanent injunction over the suit property while dismissing the counter-claim and directing defendants 2-4 to pay suit costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court decreed the suit filed by plaintiffs Sivagami and S.M. Sathasivam, holding that the 1st defendant's unilateral cancellation of their 2009 settlement deed was void and impermissible under Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act. The court also declared the subsequent 2014 settlement deed and power of attorney executed by defendants 2-4 as null and void, granting the plaintiffs permanent injunction over the suit property while dismissing the counter-claim and directing defendants 2-4 to pay suit costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts