Sangeetha and 2 others vs Alagarsamy and 4others — 322/2024
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section or7 r1. Status: Issue of Service. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNMD230006842024
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
802/2024
Filing Date
21-09-2024
Registration No
322/2024
Registration Date
05-11-2024
Court
Sub Court, Melur
Judge
2-Sub Judge, Melur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sangeetha and 2 others
Adv. Raj Prabhakaran
Minor.Swetha
Minor.Rishvath
Respondent(s)
Alagarsamy and 4others
Shanthi
Kannan
Brintha
Indhumathi
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Sub Judge, Melur
Issue of Service
Issue of Service
Issue of Service
Issue of Service
Issue of Service
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-04-2026 | Issue of Service |
| 16-03-2026 | Issue of Service |
| 19-02-2026 | Issue of Service |
| 07-01-2026 | Issue of Service |
| 27-11-2025 | Issue of Service |
Interim Orders
CASE SUMMARY: O.S. No. 322/2024, Melur Sub Court The petition filed by Sangeetha and her two minor children against Alagarsamy, Santhi, Kannan, Brendha, and Indhumathi seeking an interim injunction to restrain the defendants from selling family ancestral property was allowed on 01.08.2025. The petitioner alleged the 3rd respondent (her husband) abandoned the family in 2020 without maintenance, sold her jewelry, and that defendants now threaten to sell ancestral property in Keezhakalandari. With respondents 1, 2, 4, and 5 absent and unrepresented (no counter-filed), the court granted the injunction preventing sale until property shares are divided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
CASE SUMMARY: O.S. No. 322/2024, Melur Sub Court The petition filed by Sangeetha and her two minor children against Alagarsamy, Santhi, Kannan, Brendha, and Indhumathi seeking an interim injunction to restrain the defendants from selling family ancestral property was allowed on 01.08.2025. The petitioner alleged the 3rd respondent (her husband) abandoned the family in 2020 without maintenance, sold her jewelry, and that defendants now threaten to sell ancestral property in Keezhakalandari. With respondents 1, 2, 4, and 5 absent and unrepresented (no counter-filed), the court granted the injunction preventing sale until property shares are divided. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts