Rajendran vs Mahalingam @ Ramesh Advocate - Tr.N.Balaji — 25/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order 7, Rule 1. Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRM160002152022
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
25/2020
Filing Date
13-10-2020
Registration No
25/2020
Registration Date
13-10-2020
Court
District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajendran
Adv. Tmt.K.Kala
Respondent(s)
Mahalingam @ Ramesh Advocate - Tr.N.Balaji
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Part Heard
Part Heard
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Part Heard |
| 12-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 09-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-01-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a civil suit (O.S. 25/2020) heard in the District Court at Tirupati, Tamil Nadu, concerning a property dispute over ancestral land and a house. The court examined the cross-examination testimony of PW1 (the plaintiff's son) regarding property divisions, ancestral assets valued at approximately 2.45 cents, and disputes over partition between the plaintiff and the defendant's father. The judgment addresses the plaintiff's claims regarding ownership and division of inherited property, finding that certain assertions by the plaintiff were not substantiated and dismissing several of his contentions regarding partition and property rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a civil suit (O.S. 25/2020) heard in the District Court at Tirupati, Tamil Nadu, concerning a property dispute over ancestral land and a house. The court examined the cross-examination testimony of PW1 (the plaintiff's son) regarding property divisions, ancestral assets valued at approximately 2.45 cents, and disputes over partition between the plaintiff and the defendant's father. The judgment addresses the plaintiff's claims regarding ownership and division of inherited property, finding that certain assertions by the plaintiff were not substantiated and dismissing several of his contentions regarding partition and property 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