SATHYA vs POOPATHIRAJA AND OTHERS Advocate - N.MANOHARAN — 1300160/2018
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section ORDER7RULE1. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 21st April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNKR090002992018
Next Hearing
21st April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1300280/2018
Filing Date
06-08-2018
Registration No
1300160/2018
Registration Date
06-08-2018
Court
District Munsif Court, Kulithalai
Judge
16-Additional District Munsif, Kulithalai
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SATHYA
Adv. M.PARAMASIVAM
Respondent(s)
POOPATHIRAJA AND OTHERS Advocate - N.MANOHARAN
KANAKARAJ
Adv. N.MANOHARAN
RAJALAKSHMI
Adv. N.MANOHARAN
PARASAKTHI
Adv. N.MANOHARAN
KANDASAMY
Adv. R.M.SENTHIL
ARUMUGAM
Adv. R.M.SENTHIL
MANI
Adv. EXPARTE
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THE TASHILDAR
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THE TASHILDAR
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
VILLAGE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SUB REGISTRAR
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SELVARAJ
Adv. S.BHASKAR
Hearing History
Judge: 16-Additional District Munsif, Kulithalai
Trial
Amendment
Amendment
Amendment
Amendment
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | Trial | |
| 08-04-2026 | Amendment | |
| 06-04-2026 | Amendment | |
| 01-04-2026 | Amendment | |
| 26-03-2026 | Amendment |
Interim Orders
Summary: The petition filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC to implead two proposed parties (T.S. Kannan and Subramanian) as defendants in a property partition suit was allowed. The court determined that these parties are necessary to the suit since they claim rival title over disputed property in S.F. No. 514/1 through a power deed and subsequent sale, and their presence is essential for fair and complete adjudication of title disputes that cannot be decided at the interim stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The petition filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC to implead two proposed parties (T.S. Kannan and Subramanian) as defendants in a property partition suit was allowed. The court determined that these parties are necessary to the suit since they claim rival title over disputed property in S.F. No. 514/1 through a power deed and subsequent sale, and their presence is essential for fair and complete adjudication of title disputes that cannot be decided at the interim stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts