Sathiyaraj vs Kaliyammal — 132/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7,Rule1to6,261. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM010056452024
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
703/2024
Filing Date
30-10-2024
Registration No
132/2024
Registration Date
30-10-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram
Judge
2-Additional District Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sathiyaraj
Adv. Thiru. B.Sundararajan
Respondent(s)
Kaliyammal
Devi
Shanmuga Kani
Kalaiyarasi
Minor,Kaviyarasan, through its power agent, Kalaiyarasi
Minor.Danish, through its power agent, Kalaiyarasi
Geetharani
Mallika
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Additional District Judge
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This is a Tamil-language court order from OS. 8/2015 dated 24.03.2026 from Ramanathapuram district court. The order documents cross-examination testimony of a defendant regarding property disputes, inheritance matters, and claims involving ancestral property sharing. The judge's order (at the end) affirms that defendants must pay Rs. 28 lakhs to plaintiffs for their share of ancestral property according to Islamic inheritance law, with the judge finding the defendants' contradictory statements regarding gifts and wills unsubstantiated. The case involves competing claims over property succession and partition rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a Tamil-language court order from OS. 8/2015 dated 24.03.2026 from Ramanathapuram district court. The order documents cross-examination testimony of a defendant regarding property disputes, inheritance matters, and claims involving ancestral property sharing. The judge's order (at the end) affirms that defendants must pay Rs. 28 lakhs to plaintiffs for their share of ancestral property according to Islamic inheritance law, with the judge finding the defendants' contradictory statements regarding gifts and wills unsubstantiated. The case involves competing claims over property succession and partition rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts