P.Arumugam vs T.Chellam and 3 others Advocate - N.Namasivayam — 100385/2010
Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNMD130000032010
Next Hearing
23rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
100385/2010
Filing Date
23-07-2010
Registration No
100385/2010
Registration Date
23-07-2010
Court
District Munsif Court, Thirumangalam
Judge
1-Principal District Munsif,Thirumangalam
Petitioner(s)
P.Arumugam
Adv. M.M.Lingasamy
Respondent(s)
T.Chellam and 3 others Advocate - N.Namasivayam
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Principal District Munsif,Thirumangalam
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
For further Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | IA Pending | |
| 10-12-2025 | IA Pending | |
| 05-11-2025 | IA Pending | |
| 29-10-2025 | IA Pending | |
| 13-10-2025 | For further Proceedings |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court dismissed the petitioner's Interlocutory Application (IA No. 334/2021) filed under CRP 75 and 151 CPC seeking to summon the Sub-Registrar as a witness to verify signatures on a deed dated 04.10.1950. The court held that the petition was not filed in accordance with proper legal procedure and lacked sufficient foundation, as the petitioner failed to specify which document the signatures should be compared against. Since the original deed's author had passed away and no basis for comparison was provided, the court ruled the petition was not maintainable under the CPC and dismissed it without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court dismissed the petitioner's Interlocutory Application (IA No. 334/2021) filed under CRP 75 and 151 CPC seeking to summon the Sub-Registrar as a witness to verify signatures on a deed dated 04.10.1950. The court held that the petition was not filed in accordance with proper legal procedure and lacked sufficient foundation, as the petitioner failed to specify which document the signatures should be compared against. Since the original deed's author had passed away and no basis for comparison was provided, the court ruled the petition was not maintainable under the CPC and dismissed it without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts