Magalingam vs Sappani Advocate - Exparte — 26/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or7R1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM090000342024
Next Hearing
03rd June 2026
Filing Number
41/2024
Filing Date
04-10-2024
Registration No
26/2024
Registration Date
04-10-2024
Court
District Munsif Court, Mudhukulathur
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Magalingam
Adv. Mr.Y.T.Ansari
Respondent(s)
Sappani Advocate - Exparte
K.Pushpavalli
Adv. Mr.Ali akbar
M.Shanmugavalli
Adv. Mr.Ali akbar
Jothimurugan
Adv. Mr.Karthikeyan
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 15-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 27-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: O.S.No.26/2024 Hearing Date: 22.09.2025 Outcome: Case adjourned with cross-examination of witnesses continuing. The plaintiff's witness was recalled, sworn in, and cross-examined by defendants 2-4 regarding a property dispute involving survey numbers 327/9A1 and 327/9A2 in Kandulavil village. The court found the plaintiff's testimony deficient on several material points, including lack of documentary evidence and contradictions regarding ancestral property ownership and maintenance expenses. No re-cross-examination was allowed, and the hearing concluded at 11:45 AM. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: O.S.No.26/2024 Hearing Date: 22.09.2025 Outcome: Case adjourned with cross-examination of witnesses continuing. The plaintiff's witness was recalled, sworn in, and cross-examined by defendants 2-4 regarding a property dispute involving survey numbers 327/9A1 and 327/9A2 in Kandulavil village. The court found the plaintiff's testimony deficient on several material points, including lack of documentary evidence and contradictions regarding ancestral property ownership and maintenance expenses. No re-cross-examination was allowed, and the hearing concluded at 11:45 AM. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts