Abipulla represented by Abdulpukari vs Sathiyaseelan Advocate - THIRU. S.SUNDARAIYA — 100296/2018
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section sec 27(C). Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNMY070003852018
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
100296/2018
Filing Date
07-08-2018
Registration No
100296/2018
Registration Date
07-08-2018
Court
District Munsif Court, Sirkali
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Abipulla represented by Abdulpukari
Adv. Thiru.R. Adhmanathan.
Respondent(s)
Sathiyaseelan Advocate - THIRU. S.SUNDARAIYA
Thinsath Begam
Adv. THIRU. S.SUNDARAIYA
Tashildar
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Project Director
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Tasildar
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Tamilnadu Gov. represented by District Collector
Adv. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 07-04-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 27-03-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 13-03-2026 | Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: Original Case No. 296/2018, District Munsiff Court, Sirkali (Tamil Nadu) Date: March 13, 2026 Outcome: Cross-examination of witness PW2 (Prakasam) and defendants 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 concluded. The witness testimony regarding the plaintiff's property dispute and alleged transfer of land was largely discredited—the witness admitted lack of knowledge about key details, absence of supporting documents, and that he was providing testimony based on personal relationship with the plaintiff rather than factual evidence. Cross-examination completed with no further examination recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: Original Case No. 296/2018, District Munsiff Court, Sirkali (Tamil Nadu) Date: March 13, 2026 Outcome: Cross-examination of witness PW2 (Prakasam) and defendants 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 concluded. The witness testimony regarding the plaintiff's property dispute and alleged transfer of land was largely discredited—the witness admitted lack of knowledge about key details, absence of supporting documents, and that he was providing testimony based on personal relationship with the plaintiff rather than factual evidence. Cross-examination completed with no further examination recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts