Mariya sengol vs Karmelmeri — 54/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1. Status: For further Proceedings. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNRM160010282022

For further Proceedings

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

Filing Number

54/2022

Filing Date

10-06-2022

Registration No

54/2022

Registration Date

10-06-2022

Court

District Munsif Court, Thiruvadanai

Judge

1-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1

Petitioner(s)

Mariya sengol

Adv. Tr. K. Ramesh

Respondent(s)

Karmelmeri

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif

18-04-2026

For further Proceedings

12-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

16-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

29-01-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

18-12-2025

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Interim Orders

20-10-2022
Copy of Judgment

Petition Allowed - Temporary Injunction Granted The District Munsif Court of Thiruvadanai granted a temporary injunction in favor of the Petitioner (Mariyasenkol) against the Respondent (Kaarmelmeri) on October 20, 2022. The court found that the Petitioner established a prima facie case of possession over the disputed property (Survey No. 393), with supporting documentation including patta and SLR records, and determined the balance of convenience favored restraining the Respondent from further construction during the pendency of the main suit. The Respondent is restrained from interfering with the Petitioner's peaceful possession of the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Petition Allowed - Temporary Injunction Granted The District Munsif Court of Thiruvadanai granted a temporary injunction in favor of the Petitioner (Mariyasenkol) against the Respondent (Kaarmelmeri) on October 20, 2022. The court found that the Petitioner established a prima facie case of possession over the disputed property (Survey No. 393), with supporting documentation including patta and SLR records, and determined the balance of convenience favored restraining the Respondent from further construction during the pendency of the main suit. The Respondent is restrained from interfering with the Petitioner's peaceful possession of the disputed property. 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