THIRUMALAI J vs VIJAYA R Advocate - RAMAMOORTHY P — 85/2019
Case under Suitsvaluationact Section 27(c). Status: Additional Written Statement. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNRP080001532019
Next Hearing
02nd June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
207/2019
Filing Date
17-09-2019
Registration No
85/2019
Registration Date
17-09-2019
Court
District Munsif Court, Arakkonam
Judge
4-District Munsif, Arakkonam
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THIRUMALAI J
Adv. MATHINIRAISELVAN C
Respondent(s)
VIJAYA R Advocate - RAMAMOORTHY P
RAMACHANDRAN
Adv. RAMAMOORTHY P
RAVI
Adv. RAMAMOORTHY P
Hearing History
Judge: 4-District Munsif, Arakkonam
Additional Written Statement
Additional Written Statement
Amendment
Amendment
Amendment
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Additional Written Statement | |
| 17-03-2026 | Additional Written Statement | |
| 09-03-2026 | Amendment | |
| 02-03-2026 | Amendment | |
| 24-02-2026 | Amendment |
Interim Orders
Summary: The District Munsif Court, Arakkonam allowed the petitioner's application to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC to correct property descriptions by adding proper boundaries as per the Advocate Commissioner's report. The court found the amendment necessary to determine the real dispute without changing the suit's nature, and since trial had not commenced, allowed it in the interest of justice. The petitioner was ordered to pay Rs. 2,000 in costs to the respondent, failing which the petition would be dismissed automatically. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The District Munsif Court, Arakkonam allowed the petitioner's application to amend the plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC to correct property descriptions by adding proper boundaries as per the Advocate Commissioner's report. The court found the amendment necessary to determine the real dispute without changing the suit's nature, and since trial had not commenced, allowed it in the interest of justice. The petitioner was ordered to pay Rs. 2,000 in costs to the respondent, failing which the petition would be dismissed automatically. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts