Pavunthai / Meenakshi vs Natarajan and another — 2/2025

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 43R1CPC. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 06th April 2026.

CMA - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal

CNR: TNMD240002362025

Case disposed

Filing Number

232/2025

Filing Date

21-06-2025

Registration No

2/2025

Registration Date

21-06-2025

Court

Sub Court, Usilampatti

Judge

3-Sub Judge, Usilampatti

Decision Date

06th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 43R1CPC

Petitioner(s)

Pavunthai / Meenakshi

Adv. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM A

Respondent(s)

Natarajan and another

Dilipan

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Sub Judge, Usilampatti

06-04-2026

Disposed

30-03-2026

Orders

16-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

12-03-2026

Arguments

05-03-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

06-04-2026
Copy of Judgment/Order

Court Decision Summary The Subsidiary Court in Usilampatti rejected the appellant's property appeal (Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 02/2025) challenging an Interim Application order dated 10.03.2025. The court found that since the plaintiff sought injunctive relief in the original suit and the interim relief sought were identical, granting interim injunction would be improper. The court upheld the lower court's decision, holding that the appellant failed to adequately present evidence regarding land partition claims and could not pursue interim relief without first establishing substantive rights in the main suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Subsidiary Court in Usilampatti rejected the appellant's property appeal (Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 02/2025) challenging an Interim Application order dated 10.03.2025. The court found that since the plaintiff sought injunctive relief in the original suit and the interim relief sought were identical, granting interim injunction would be improper. The court upheld the lower court's decision, holding that the appellant failed to adequately present evidence regarding land partition claims and could not pursue interim relief without first establishing substantive rights in the main suit. 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

Sub Court, Usilampatti All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case