Kavitha (Diabled person) NF Anbazhagan vs Kathiravan — 61/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Ord7R1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 05th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNPB010065802024

Evidence

Next Hearing

05th June 2026

Filing Number

669/2024

Filing Date

16-11-2024

Registration No

61/2024

Registration Date

21-11-2024

Court

Principal District Court, Perambalur

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur.

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Ord7R1

Petitioner(s)

Kavitha (Diabled person) NF Anbazhagan

Adv. G. SUBRAMANIAN, M.A., B.L.,

Respondent(s)

Kathiravan

Ayyammal

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge, Perambalur.

29-04-2026

Evidence

15-04-2026

Evidence

06-04-2026

Evidence

25-03-2026

Evidence

11-03-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

15-04-2026
Copy of Oral Evidence/Deposition

Summary: In this OS.No.61/2024 before the Principal District Court, Perambalur (dated 15.04.2026), the court examined witness PW2-Muthusamy's cross-examination testimony regarding property ownership disputes. The court found that the plaintiff Kavitha's claim to have purchased property in 2012 was contradicted by the defendant's evidence, and determined that the plaintiff's disability status and property rights required further substantiation through documentary evidence. The matter appears to be under examination with the court noting credibility issues and directing that evidence regarding ancestral property ownership and transaction details be properly established before final adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In this OS.No.61/2024 before the Principal District Court, Perambalur (dated 15.04.2026), the court examined witness PW2-Muthusamy's cross-examination testimony regarding property ownership disputes. The court found that the plaintiff Kavitha's claim to have purchased property in 2012 was contradicted by the defendant's evidence, and determined that the plaintiff's disability status and property rights required further substantiation through documentary evidence. The matter appears to be under examination with the court noting credibility issues and directing that evidence regarding ancestral property ownership and transaction details be properly established before final adjudication. 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

Principal District Court, Perambalur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case