MAGESH R vs SESHASAYANAM R Advocate - DINESHKUMAR P — 19/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7,R1 ANS 2. Status: Judgement. Next hearing: 18th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRP050000372024
Next Hearing
18th March 2026
Filing Number
19/2024
Filing Date
03-01-2023
Registration No
19/2024
Registration Date
03-01-2023
Court
II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam
Judge
1-2nd Additional District Judge, Arakkonam
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MAGESH R
Adv. RAMAMOORTHY P
Respondent(s)
SESHASAYANAM R Advocate - DINESHKUMAR P
Hearing History
Judge: 1-2nd Additional District Judge, Arakkonam
Judgement
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 05-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 02-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 24-02-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: OS.NO 19/2024 | Court: Additional District and Sessions Judge, Arakkonam | Date: 11.02.2026 The court recorded the cross-examination of the defendant (DW 1) in a property dispute case involving a land sale agreement (Exhibit A.1) dated 02.09.2021. The defendant claimed he signed the agreement without reading it and alleged the document was fabricated by the plaintiff to misappropriate his land worth ₹2 crores, though he only received ₹60 lakhs in advance for a ₹75 lakh sale. The case involves disputes over loan repayment, property documents, and allegations of forgery. The hearing stands adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: OS.NO 19/2024 | Court: Additional District and Sessions Judge, Arakkonam | Date: 11.02.2026 The court recorded the cross-examination of the defendant (DW 1) in a property dispute case involving a land sale agreement (Exhibit A.1) dated 02.09.2021. The defendant claimed he signed the agreement without reading it and alleged the document was fabricated by the plaintiff to misappropriate his land worth ₹2 crores, though he only received ₹60 lakhs in advance for a ₹75 lakh sale. The case involves disputes over loan repayment, property documents, and allegations of forgery. The hearing stands adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts