R.Gunasekaran vs V.Vanaja and 10 others — 121/2020

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 27(c). Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNKP080002102020

IA Pending

Next Hearing

04th June 2026

Filing Number

263/2020

Filing Date

14-10-2020

Registration No

121/2020

Registration Date

16-10-2020

Court

Principal District Munsif Court, Kancheepuram

Judge

3-Principal District Munsif

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 27(c)

Petitioner(s)

R.Gunasekaran

Adv. B.Sivakumar

Respondent(s)

V.Vanaja and 10 others

S.Vajjiram

V.Senthil

Ramamoorthy

S.Saroja

V.Chamundeeswari

Rajeshwari

S.Vijayalakshmi

The Special Tahsildar

The Inspector of Survey

The District Collector

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Principal District Munsif

22-04-2026

IA Pending

15-04-2026

IA Pending

06-04-2026

IA Pending

12-03-2026

IA Pending

20-02-2026

For further Proceedings

Interim Orders

08-11-2022
Copy of Order
08-11-2022
Copy of Order

Case Summary: O.S. No. 121/2020 Outcome: Petition dismissed. R. Gunasekaran sought to condone a 246-day delay in filing an application to set aside the abatement of his suit following the death of the 2nd defendant (S. Vajjiram). He cited medical treatment for eye condition as justification and sought to implead Palani, the deceased's legal heir, as the 12th defendant. The Principal District Munsif, Kancheepuram rejected the petition, finding that no cause of action arose against the proposed party at the time of suit filing (7 October 2019), and therefore Palani was not a necessary party to the permanent injunction suit against the original 8 defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. No. 121/2020 Outcome: Petition dismissed. R. Gunasekaran sought to condone a 246-day delay in filing an application to set aside the abatement of his suit following the death of the 2nd defendant (S. Vajjiram). He cited medical treatment for eye condition as justification and sought to implead Palani, the deceased's legal heir, as the 12th defendant. The Principal District Munsif, Kancheepuram rejected the petition, finding that no cause of action arose against the proposed party at the time of suit filing (7 October 2019), and therefore Palani was not a necessary party to the permanent injunction suit against the original 8 defendants. 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, Kancheepuram All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case