Maheswari vs Divisional Engineer Advocate - Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP — 148/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7,Rule1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM160001582023
Filing Number
158/2023
Filing Date
04-Dec-2023
Registration No
148/2023
Registration Date
04-Dec-2023
Court
District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai
Judge
1-District Munsif
Last updated 25-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Maheswari
Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh
-
2.Kalleswari
Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh
-
3.Raji
Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh
Respondent(s)
-
1.Divisional Engineer Advocate - Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP
-
2.Divisional Engineer
Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP
-
3.Assistant Divisional Engineer
Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP
-
4.Sub Treasury Officer
Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP
Case History
-
10-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
20-Feb-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
22-Jan-2026
Evidence
District Munsif
-
12-Dec-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
04-Dec-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
31-Oct-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
10-Oct-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
12-Sep-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
08-Sep-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
13-Aug-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
08-Jul-2025
Copy of DepositionView PDF
Case Summary Case: O.S. No. 148/2023, Tirupuvanam District Civil Court Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff's (Mrs. Mageswari) claims are riddled with contradictions and lack legal merit. The plaintiff claimed to be the legally married wife of the deceased pension holder (Panneer Selvam) to claim his pension benefits, but her testimony revealed inconsistencies—particularly regarding the deceased's first wife (Pechiyammal) and conflicting statements about their marital status and nominee designation in the service register. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-Jul-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
20-Jun-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
22-Apr-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
27-Mar-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
21-Feb-2025
Evidence
District Munsif
-
17-Feb-2025
Trial
District Munsif
-
31-Jan-2025
Trial
District Munsif
-
30-Jan-2025
Trial
District Munsif
-
20-Dec-2024
Trial
District Munsif
-
07-Dec-2024
Trial
District Munsif
-
20-Nov-2024
Issues
District Munsif
-
15-Oct-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
03-Oct-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
19-Sep-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
21-Aug-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
12-Aug-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
05-Aug-2024
Service Pending
District Munsif
-
02-Aug-2024
Evidence
District Munsif
-
11-Jul-2024
Evidence
District Munsif
-
27-Jun-2024
Evidence
District Munsif
-
18-Jun-2024
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
11-Jun-2024
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
07-Jun-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
29-Apr-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
08-Apr-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
20-Mar-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
27-Feb-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
29-Jan-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
09-Jan-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
04-Dec-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
04-Dec-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 148/2023
Case Summary Case: O.S. No. 148/2023, Tirupuvanam District Civil Court Outcome: The petition is dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff's (Mrs. Mageswari) claims are riddled with contradictions and lack legal merit. The plaintiff claimed to be the legally married wife of the deceased pension holder (Panneer Selvam) to claim his pension benefits, but her testimony revealed inconsistencies—particularly regarding the deceased's first wife (Pechiyammal) and conflicting statements about their marital status and nominee designation in the service register. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts