Regina Packiavathi Nadachi 7 others vs Pushparaj Advocate - Adv.Thayumana swamy — 200036/2007
Status: Enquiry. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNKK080000152007
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
200036/2007
Filing Date
12-03-2007
Registration No
200036/2007
Registration Date
21-04-2007
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram
Judge
2-Principal District Munsif
Petitioner(s)
Regina Packiavathi Nadachi 7 others
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
Prabhavathi Princilla Snehabai
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
Rajakumar
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
V.R. Rajeswari
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
V.R. Rjan
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
V.R.Sajiv
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
Sanjeev
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
Respondent(s)
Pushparaj Advocate - Adv.Thayumana swamy
Rajayyan
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
V.N. Rajasingh
Adv. Adv.K.Chellappan
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Principal District Munsif
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
Enquiry
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-04-2026 | Enquiry |
| 22-04-2026 | Enquiry |
| 17-04-2026 | Enquiry |
| 10-04-2026 | Enquiry |
| 06-04-2026 | Enquiry |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Execution Petition No. 36/2007 was allowed. The court ordered that the judgment-debtor (defendant) pay the entire judgment amount of ₹4,942 plus 6% annual interest to the judgment-creditors, along with court costs of ₹1,374.95. The court clarified that all eight defendants are jointly and severally liable for the full judgment amount, not just the first defendant individually, and rejected the petition's contention that only one defendant was liable for payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Execution Petition No. 36/2007 was allowed. The court ordered that the judgment-debtor (defendant) pay the entire judgment amount of ₹4,942 plus 6% annual interest to the judgment-creditors, along with court costs of ₹1,374.95. The court clarified that all eight defendants are jointly and severally liable for the full judgment amount, not just the first defendant individually, and rejected the petition's contention that only one defendant was liable for payment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts