Rani and 9 others vs Sheyadu Sekana and 5 others Advocate - Mr.M.Dharmar — 45/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7,Rule 1. Status: Additional Issues. Next hearing: 01st April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM090000572021
Next Hearing
01st April 2026
Filing Number
70/2021
Filing Date
30-09-2021
Registration No
45/2021
Registration Date
30-09-2021
Court
District Munsif Court, Mudhukulathur
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rani and 9 others
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Anees Fathima
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Mohamed Arfath
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Hamida Begum
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Seeni Mumtaj Begum
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Ameena Bivi
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Pitchai Kani
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Shahul Hameed
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Ajarudeen
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Shachima Begum
Adv. Mr.G.Janakiraman
Respondent(s)
Sheyadu Sekana and 5 others Advocate - Mr.M.Dharmar
Seyinsha Begum
Adv. Mr.M.Dharmar
Jajeena Begum
Adv. Mr.M.Dharmar
Kaderammal
Adv. Mr.M.Dharmar
Nasrin Begum
Adv. Exparte
Sheik Raja Ussain Kani
Adv. Exparte
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Additional Issues
Additional Written Statement
Amendment
Service Pending
Amendment
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Additional Issues |
| 06-03-2026 | Additional Written Statement |
| 05-03-2026 | Amendment |
| 26-02-2026 | Service Pending |
| 12-02-2026 | Amendment |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary The District Munsif Court in Mudukulathur allowed the petition for amendment of the plaint filed by the plaintiffs in a property dispute case. The court permitted the plaintiffs to amend their plaint to include a prayer for mandatory injunction regarding a disputed borewell located on the suit property (marked as X on the Commissioner's plan), finding a triable issue exists between parties over the borewell's location and whether it was dug before or during litigation. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary The District Munsif Court in Mudukulathur allowed the petition for amendment of the plaint filed by the plaintiffs in a property dispute case. The court permitted the plaintiffs to amend their plaint to include a prayer for mandatory injunction regarding a disputed borewell located on the suit property (marked as X on the Commissioner's plan), finding a triable issue exists between parties over the borewell's location and whether it was dug before or during litigation. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts