U.Shanmugam Pillai vs P.Muthandi and seven others Advocate - R.Srinivasan — 100184/2015
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section U/o.VIIofRule1ofCPC. Status: Judgement. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNMD150002782015
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
100184/2015
Filing Date
23-07-2015
Registration No
100184/2015
Registration Date
24-07-2015
Court
District Munsif Court, Melur
Judge
1-District Munsif, Melur.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
U.Shanmugam Pillai
Adv. C.Subramani
Respondent(s)
P.Muthandi and seven others Advocate - R.Srinivasan
M.Balamurugan
Adv. R.Srinivasan
Thavamani
Adv. R.Srinivasan
Pandi
Adv. R.Srinivasan
P.Chellaiah
The District Collector, Madurai
The Tahsildar Melur
The Commissioner, Kottampatti panchayat
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif, Melur.
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 26-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 17-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 09-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: O.S. No. 184/2015 | Date: 15.07.2025 The witness examination was completed and cross-examination of defendants 6-8 was conducted. The court found that the plaintiffs lack any legal rights over the government land (Pennalchikulam) in dispute and rejected their claims to remove the Karuppaswamy temple situated on the property, which has existed only since 2012. The petition is dismissed as the court determined the plaintiffs have no substantive rights to the government-owned land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: O.S. No. 184/2015 | Date: 15.07.2025 The witness examination was completed and cross-examination of defendants 6-8 was conducted. The court found that the plaintiffs lack any legal rights over the government land (Pennalchikulam) in dispute and rejected their claims to remove the Karuppaswamy temple situated on the property, which has existed only since 2012. The petition is dismissed as the court determined the plaintiffs have no substantive rights to the government-owned land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts