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

Evidence

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

Filing Number

158/2023

Filing Date

04-12-2023

Registration No

148/2023

Registration Date

04-12-2023

Court

District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai

Judge

1-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Order7,Rule1

Petitioner(s)

Maheswari

Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh

Kalleswari

Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh

Raji

Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh

Respondent(s)

Divisional Engineer Advocate - Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP

Divisional Engineer

Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP

Assistant Divisional Engineer

Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP

Sub Treasury Officer

Adv. Tr.K.Ganeshaprabhu GP

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif

06-03-2026

Evidence

20-02-2026

Evidence

22-01-2026

Evidence

12-12-2025

Evidence

04-12-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

08-07-2025
Copy of Deposition

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case