Jeyaraman and others vs The state of Tamil Nadul, rep. its District Collector, Madurai. — 182/2023

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 27(c). Status: Trial. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNMD130001932023

Trial

Next Hearing

23rd June 2026

Filing Number

254/2023

Filing Date

18-07-2023

Registration No

182/2023

Registration Date

18-07-2023

Court

District Munsif Court, Thirumangalam

Judge

2-Additional District Munsif, Thirumangalam

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 27(c)

Petitioner(s)

Jeyaraman and others

Adv. M.Dhanapandian

Aasha

Adv. M.Dhanapandian

Respondent(s)

The state of Tamil Nadul, rep. its District Collector, Madurai.

The Revenue Divisional Officer,

The Tahsildar,

The Revenue Inspector

The Village Administrative Officer

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Additional District Munsif, Thirumangalam

16-04-2026

Trial

16-03-2026

Trial

06-02-2026

Trial

19-11-2025

Trial

10-10-2025

Trial

Interim Orders

10-01-2025
Copy of Judgment/Order

Case 182/2023 Summary Interim Application 3/2023 - DISMISSED Petitioners Jeyaraman and Aasha sought an interim injunction to restrain the respondent revenue officials from interfering with their possession of property during the pendency of the main case. The Additional District Munsiff's Court (Thirumanagalam) rejected the petition, holding that petitioners failed to demonstrate: (1) a prima facie case with merit, and (2) irreparable loss if the injunction were denied. The court found no substantive evidence or documents supporting their claims and dismissed the interim application without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 182/2023 Summary Interim Application 3/2023 - DISMISSED Petitioners Jeyaraman and Aasha sought an interim injunction to restrain the respondent revenue officials from interfering with their possession of property during the pendency of the main case. The Additional District Munsiff's Court (Thirumanagalam) rejected the petition, holding that petitioners failed to demonstrate: (1) a prima facie case with merit, and (2) irreparable loss if the injunction were denied. The court found no substantive evidence or documents supporting their claims and dismissed the interim application without costs. 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

District Munsif Court, Thirumangalam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case