IDOL OF ARULMIGU BALASUBRAMANIYASWAMY THIRUKOVIL, PUGALIMALAI REP BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER vs R.KOLANDAYEE AND 20 OTHERS Advocate - N.THIRUMOORTHY — 34/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section OR7R1. Disposed: Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree on 18th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKR010001482025
Filing Number
44/2025
Filing Date
09-Jan-2025
Registration No
34/2025
Registration Date
28-Jan-2025
Court
Principal District Court, Karur
Judge
1-District Judge
Decision Date
18-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.IDOL OF ARULMIGU BALASUBRAMANIYASWAMY THIRUKOVIL, PUGALIMALAI REP BY EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Adv. S.RAMESH
Respondent(s)
-
1.R.KOLANDAYEE AND 20 OTHERS Advocate - N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
2.S.SENTHILKUMAR
-
3.S.VASANTHAPRABHU
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
4.S.KALAISELVI
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
5.M.SABITHA
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
6.S.GOGULNATH
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
7.K.VISWANATHAN
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
8.G.CHITRA
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
9.K.AMUTHA
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
10.K.RAVIKUMAR
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
11.M.SAROJA
-
12.S.SHANMUGAM
-
13.M.SURESH
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
14.M.ESWARI
-
15.K.RAGUPATHI
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
16.S.JASMINE
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
17.M.MUHAMMED YAHOOB
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
18.K.IYAPPAN
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
19.K.RAVICHANDRAN
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
-
20.M.KANDIYANNAN
-
21.C.ELANGO
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Case Summary: Idol of Arulmigu Balasubramaniyaswamy Thirukovil v. R. Kolandayee (OS 34/2025) Court Decision: The District and Sessions Judge, Karur, decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff temple. The court declared the plaintiff idol as the absolute owner of the suit property (Survey No. 462) and directed all 21 defendants to deliver possession within two months. The court also nullified the 1963 settlement patta issued to Sangameswara Iyer. Key Reasoning: The court held that under Section 10(c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, temple lands cannot be granted ryotwari patta. The settlement tahsildar's order granting patta was therefore void and without jurisdiction, as it violated statutory provisions exempting temple property from conversion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Mar-2026
Disposed
District Judge
-
17-Mar-2026
Judgement
District Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence / DepositionView PDF
-
10-Mar-2026
Judgement
District Judge
-
24-Feb-2026
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
23-Jan-2026
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
02-Jan-2026
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
15-Dec-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
10-Dec-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
05-Dec-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
10-Nov-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
29-Oct-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Judge
-
16-Oct-2025
Written Statement
District Judge
-
08-Oct-2025
Written Statement
District Judge
-
26-Sep-2025
Written Statement
District Judge
-
10-Sep-2025
Written Statement
District Judge
-
25-Aug-2025
Written Statement
District Judge
-
25-Jul-2025
Publication
District Judge
-
19-Jul-2025
Steps
District Judge
-
03-Jul-2025
Steps
District Judge
-
29-Apr-2025
Issue of Service
District Judge
-
10-Mar-2025
Batta
District Judge
-
28-Jan-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Jan-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 34/2025
Case Summary: Idol of Arulmigu Balasubramaniyaswamy Thirukovil v. R. Kolandayee (OS 34/2025) Court Decision: The District and Sessions Judge, Karur, decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff temple. The court declared the plaintiff idol as the absolute owner of the suit property (Survey No. 462) and directed all 21 defendants to deliver possession within two months. The court also nullified the 1963 settlement patta issued to Sangameswara Iyer. Key Reasoning: The court held that under Section 10(c) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, temple lands cannot be granted ryotwari patta. The settlement tahsildar's order granting patta was therefore void and without jurisdiction, as it violated statutory provisions exempting temple property from conversion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts