Palkeesa Beevi vs The district Collector and five others Advocate - M.Vairamani and Government Pleader and Subramanian — 100117/2009
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/order7Rule1ofCPC. Status: Stay. Next hearing: 31st July 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNMD150000292009
Next Hearing
31st July 2026
Filing Date
28-04-2009
Registration No
100117/2009
Registration Date
30-06-2009
Court
District Munsif Court, Melur
Judge
1-District Munsif, Melur.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Palkeesa Beevi
Adv. k.Sulthan Allowdhin
Respondent(s)
The district Collector and five others Advocate - M.Vairamani and Government Pleader and Subramanian
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif, Melur.
Stay
Stay
Stay
Stay
Stay
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-06-2026 | Stay |
| 24-04-2026 | Stay |
| 16-03-2026 | Stay |
| 24-02-2026 | Stay |
| 23-01-2026 | Stay |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: I.A No.3/2024 in O.S.No.117/2009 Outcome: Petition dismissed with no cost. The District Munsif, Melur rejected the petitioners' request to appoint an advocate commissioner for local investigation of disputed property. The court found the petitioners' claim lacked clarity—they cited a 1928 sale deed without survey numbers and claimed property under S.No.704/74, but the FMB sketch showed boundaries matching S.No.704/73 instead. Without sufficient documentary evidence establishing the exact property location, the court deemed appointing a commissioner improper and dismissed the petition on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: I.A No.3/2024 in O.S.No.117/2009 Outcome: Petition dismissed with no cost. The District Munsif, Melur rejected the petitioners' request to appoint an advocate commissioner for local investigation of disputed property. The court found the petitioners' claim lacked clarity—they cited a 1928 sale deed without survey numbers and claimed property under S.No.704/74, but the FMB sketch showed boundaries matching S.No.704/73 instead. Without sufficient documentary evidence establishing the exact property location, the court deemed appointing a commissioner improper and dismissed the petition on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts