Ibrahim Ammal vs Mohamed Arabi — 70/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7,Rule1. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM010027252024
Filing Number
337/2024
Filing Date
13-Jun-2024
Registration No
70/2024
Registration Date
14-Jun-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram
Judge
2-Additional District Judge
Last updated 24-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Ibrahim Ammal
Adv. Thiru. A.Thirunavukkarasu
Respondent(s)
-
1.Mohamed Arabi
-
2.Aadham Malik
-
3.Seeni Meerangani
-
4.Kulsiya Banu
-
5.Karthikeyan
-
6.Vijayakumar
-
7.Karmegam
-
8.Sub-Registar, Ramanathapuram
-
9.District Registrar, Ramanathapuram
-
10.District Collector, Ramanathapuram
Case History
-
02-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
07-Apr-2026
Trial
Additional District Judge
-
24-Mar-2026
Trial
Additional District Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Trial
Additional District Judge
-
10-Feb-2026
Trial
Additional District Judge
-
18-Dec-2025
Trial
Additional District Judge
-
04-Dec-2025
Issues
Additional District Judge
-
18-Nov-2025
Issues
Additional District Judge
-
01-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
31-Oct-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
23-Oct-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
18-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
13-Aug-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
25-Jul-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
10-Jul-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Additional District Judge
-
01-Jul-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
25-Jun-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
25-Apr-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
27-Mar-2025
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
01-Mar-2025
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
06-Feb-2025
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
04-Jan-2025
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
-
04-Jan-2025
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed with Cost The Principal District Judge of Ramanathapuram granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Ibrahim Ammal on January 4, 2025, restraining respondents 1-3 from alienating undivided joint family property pending partition suit proceedings. The Court found the petitioner satisfied all three legal tests: prima facie case (as wife entitled to 1/8 share in inherited property), balance of convenience (favoring protection of undivided property from unauthorized sale), and irreparable injury (as respondents were damaging trees and fences to create unauthorized layouts for sale to third parties). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-Jan-2025
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
19-Dec-2024
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
25-Nov-2024
Issues
Principal District Judge
-
11-Nov-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
29-Oct-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
25-Oct-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
18-Oct-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
01-Oct-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
23-Sep-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
06-Sep-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
23-Aug-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
12-Aug-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
24-Jul-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
19-Jul-2024
Written Statement
Principal District Judge
-
11-Jul-2024
Issue of Service
Principal District Judge
-
14-Jun-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Jun-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 70/2024
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed with Cost The Principal District Judge of Ramanathapuram granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Ibrahim Ammal on January 4, 2025, restraining respondents 1-3 from alienating undivided joint family property pending partition suit proceedings. The Court found the petitioner satisfied all three legal tests: prima facie case (as wife entitled to 1/8 share in inherited property), balance of convenience (favoring protection of undivided property from unauthorized sale), and irreparable injury (as respondents were damaging trees and fences to create unauthorized layouts for sale to third parties). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts