Eswaran vs P.K. Palanisamy, — 200146/2014
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section UnderOrderVII,Rule1to6ofCPC. Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNSA080002642014
Next Hearing
03rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
200146/2014
Filing Date
23-06-2014
Registration No
200146/2014
Registration Date
01-07-2014
Court
District Munsif Court, Sankari
Judge
2-District Munsif, Sankari
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Eswaran
Adv. KASILINGAM K
Anbarasu,
Adv. KASILINGAM K
Sellamuthu,
Adv. KASILINGAM K
Respondent(s)
P.K. Palanisamy,
P.K. Jaganathan
Adv. M. Andavan
P. Senthilkumar
Adv. V.N. Varatharajan.
A. Manjunathan
Adv. -
Kandasamy
Adv. T. Dharmalingam
Nachimuthu
Adv. Exparte
N. Vijaya
Adv. Exparte
The Inspector of Police,
Adv. Senthil Murugan,S G.P
The District Collector,
Adv. Senthil Murugan,S G.P
The Sub Registrar,
Adv. Senthil Murugan,S G.P
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif, Sankari
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
Judgement
Judgement
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | IA Pending | |
| 30-03-2026 | IA Pending | |
| 10-03-2026 | IA Pending | |
| 02-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 26-02-2026 | Judgement |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: The District Munsif Court, Sankari dismissed an Interlocutory Application filed by defendants (6th & 7th) seeking to set aside an ex-parte order and reopen the case for defendant evidence in a suit for Declaration and Permanent Injunction (O.S.146/2014). The court found that the defendants had repeatedly failed to participate diligently despite multiple opportunities and prior applications (this being their 3rd application to set aside ex-parte order), and determined their request was an abuse of process designed to delay proceedings rather than a genuine attempt to present their defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: The District Munsif Court, Sankari dismissed an Interlocutory Application filed by defendants (6th & 7th) seeking to set aside an ex-parte order and reopen the case for defendant evidence in a suit for Declaration and Permanent Injunction (O.S.146/2014). The court found that the defendants had repeatedly failed to participate diligently despite multiple opportunities and prior applications (this being their 3rd application to set aside ex-parte order), and determined their request was an abuse of process designed to delay proceedings rather than a genuine attempt to present their defense. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts