K.SOLIYAMMAL vs S.LAKSHMI AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - K.SUBRAMANIAN — 13/2023
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section O7R1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKR010001702023
Next Hearing
03rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
53/2023
Filing Date
11-01-2023
Registration No
13/2023
Registration Date
11-01-2023
Court
Principal District Court, Karur
Judge
1-District Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K.SOLIYAMMAL
Adv. N.THIRUMOORTHY
Respondent(s)
S.LAKSHMI AND 3 OTHERS Advocate - K.SUBRAMANIAN
M.SANTHI
Adv. K.SUBRAMANIAN
R.ELAKKIYA
Adv. K.SUBRAMANIAN
R.SURESH
Adv. K.SUBRAMANIAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 01-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 23-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This is a Tamil language civil court order from the District Court in Karur (Case No. 13/2023, dated 05.02.2026). The document records the cross-examination testimony of a witness (Shaliyammaal) in a property dispute case involving agricultural land. Summary: The court conducted cross-examination of the plaintiff witness regarding disputed agricultural land (mava property). The court found that the plaintiff has not satisfactorily proven exclusive possession and enjoyment of the land since 1995, as the defendant's brother Selmutt and his heirs have been in possession and cultivation since that period. The court ruled that since 1995, the defendants have maintained possession of the land, and therefore the plaintiff's claim for cancellation of the defendant's title and removal of encumbrance should be decided based on the principles established regarding possession and the 1995 family settlement arrangement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a Tamil language civil court order from the District Court in Karur (Case No. 13/2023, dated 05.02.2026). The document records the cross-examination testimony of a witness (Shaliyammaal) in a property dispute case involving agricultural land. Summary: The court conducted cross-examination of the plaintiff witness regarding disputed agricultural land (mava property). The court found that the plaintiff has not satisfactorily proven exclusive possession and enjoyment of the land since 1995, as the defendant's brother Selmutt and his heirs have been in possession and cultivation since that period. The court ruled that since 1995, the defendants have maintained possession of the land, and therefore the plaintiff's claim for cancellation of the defendant's title and removal of encumbrance should be decided based on the principles established regarding possession and the 1995 family settlement arrangement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts