SAKTHIVEL vs KARUPPANNA GOUNDER AND OTHERS Advocate - R.RAMANATHAN — 3000585/2018

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section OR7R1. Status: Amendment. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNKR030011782018

Amendment

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

3600565/2018

Filing Date

10-07-2018

Registration No

3000585/2018

Registration Date

10-07-2018

Court

Principal Sub Court, Karur

Judge

3-Principal Sub Judge

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section OR7R1
SuitsValuationAct Section 37(2),27(c),25(b)

Petitioner(s)

SAKTHIVEL

Adv. K.RAMESH

Respondent(s)

KARUPPANNA GOUNDER AND OTHERS Advocate - R.RAMANATHAN

LAKSHMI

Adv. S.VELMURUGAN

BANUMATHI

PAPPATHI

Adv. R.RAMANATHAN

DHINAKAR

Adv. P.PALANISAMY

RAMASAMY

SENTHIL

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Principal Sub Judge

15-04-2026

Amendment

09-03-2026

Amendment

09-02-2026

Amendment

09-01-2026

Amendment

08-12-2025

Amendment

Interim Orders

27-11-2023
Copy of Oral Evidence / Deposition

Summary In Original Suit No. 585/2018 dated 27.11.2023, the court recorded the cross-examination testimony of the 4th defendant regarding disputed property ownership and settlement documents. The court found the defendant's testimony credible in establishing that certain properties were ancestral properties generating income used for subsequent property purchases, and that settlement documents executed by the plaintiff were valid and not binding on the defendant. The case is directed to proceed according to law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In Original Suit No. 585/2018 dated 27.11.2023, the court recorded the cross-examination testimony of the 4th defendant regarding disputed property ownership and settlement documents. The court found the defendant's testimony credible in establishing that certain properties were ancestral properties generating income used for subsequent property purchases, and that settlement documents executed by the plaintiff were valid and not binding on the defendant. The case is directed to proceed according to law. 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 Sub Court, Karur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case