RAMAMURTHY vs MANGALATHAMMAL — 201/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section OR7R1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 21st April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNMY030007502023
Filing Number
728/2023
Filing Date
07-Sep-2023
Registration No
201/2023
Registration Date
01-Nov-2023
Court
Principal Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai
Judge
1-Principal Sub Judge
Last updated 18-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAMAMURTHY
Adv. K.RAVICHANDRAN
Respondent(s)
-
1.MANGALATHAMMAL
-
2.RAJALAKSHMI AMMAL
-
3.PANJABIKESHAN
-
4.KRISHNAMURTHY
-
5.MALLIGA
Case History
-
21-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
17-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
15-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
09-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
07-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
01-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
27-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
18-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
16-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
09-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
05-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
03-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal Sub Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
19-Feb-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
10-Feb-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
03-Feb-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
30-Jan-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
21-Jan-2026
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
19-Dec-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
17-Dec-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
04-Dec-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
27-Nov-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
20-Nov-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
06-Nov-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
28-Oct-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
17-Oct-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
26-Sep-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
24-Sep-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
16-Sep-2025
Appearance
Principal Sub Judge
-
12-Aug-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
28-Jul-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
18-Jul-2025
Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF
In O.S. No. 201/2023, the Primary Subordinate Court of Tilaiyadi recorded witness statements from Arunachalam (age 56) and Ranathan (age 59) on 18.07.2025. The witnesses testified in their examination-in-chief, their statements were transcribed, read back to them in court, and they acknowledged the accuracy of the recorded testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Jul-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
09-Jul-2025
Copy of Oral Evidence/DepositionView PDF
-
09-Jul-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
23-Jun-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
16-Apr-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
Principal Sub Judge
-
24-Mar-2025
Publication
Principal Sub Judge
-
20-Mar-2025
Steps
Principal Sub Judge
-
12-Feb-2025
Steps
Principal Sub Judge
-
05-Feb-2025
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
30-Jan-2025
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
29-Nov-2024
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
19-Nov-2024
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
28-Oct-2024
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
22-Oct-2024
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
15-Oct-2024
Issue of Process
Principal Sub Judge
-
03-Oct-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
28-Aug-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
26-Jul-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
27-Jun-2024
Issue of Service
Principal Sub Judge
-
18-Apr-2024
Issue of Service
Principal Sub Judge
-
07-Mar-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
30-Jan-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
10-Jan-2024
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
19-Dec-2023
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
01-Dec-2023
Batta
Principal Sub Judge
-
01-Nov-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Sep-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 201/2023
In O.S. No. 201/2023, the Primary Subordinate Court of Tilaiyadi recorded witness statements from Arunachalam (age 56) and Ranathan (age 59) on 18.07.2025. The witnesses testified in their examination-in-chief, their statements were transcribed, read back to them in court, and they acknowledged the accuracy of the recorded testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts