LAKSHMI R vs SARAVANAN P Advocate - RAMESH KUMAR T — 23/2021
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section O7,R1,S26. Disposed: Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree on 10th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRP010001872021
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
201/2021
Filing Date
25-03-2021
Registration No
23/2021
Registration Date
30-03-2021
Court
Principal District Court, Ranipet
Judge
2-I Additional District Judge, Ranipet
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Ex-Parte Decree
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
LAKSHMI R
Adv. MOHAMMED SADHIQUDDIN D
SRILEKHA R
Adv. SELVARAJ A G
Respondent(s)
SARAVANAN P Advocate - RAMESH KUMAR T
SAKUNTHALA AMMAL
Adv. RAMESH KUMAR T
Hearing History
Judge: 2-I Additional District Judge, Ranipet
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
For further Proceedings
For further Proceedings
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 25-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 11-03-2026 | For further Proceedings | |
| 09-03-2026 | For further Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The I Additional District Judge, Ranipet, decreed the suit in favor of plaintiffs Lakshmi and Srilekha, granting all three reliefs sought: declaration of title, recovery of possession, and permanent injunction against the first defendant. The court found that the plaintiffs' title to the property was established through a High Court compromise decree dated 19.02.2013 and supporting documentary evidence, and that the defendant (who remained exparte) had falsely claimed title while being entrusted to manage the property. The suit against the second defendant was dismissed as he died during pendency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The I Additional District Judge, Ranipet, decreed the suit in favor of plaintiffs Lakshmi and Srilekha, granting all three reliefs sought: declaration of title, recovery of possession, and permanent injunction against the first defendant. The court found that the plaintiffs' title to the property was established through a High Court compromise decree dated 19.02.2013 and supporting documentary evidence, and that the defendant (who remained exparte) had falsely claimed title while being entrusted to manage the property. The suit against the second defendant was dismissed as he died during pendency. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts