Sivakumar and 3 others vs Thangavel — 94/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section o7r1to6. Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA120001822022
Filing Number
185/2022
Filing Date
11-Mar-2022
Registration No
94/2022
Registration Date
11-Mar-2022
Court
Sub Court, Attur
Judge
1-Sub Judge, Attur
Last updated 08-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sivakumar and 3 others
Adv. KUMARAVEL. V
-
2.Revathi
-
3.Dhanalakshmi
-
4.Sakthivel
Respondent(s)
-
1.Thangavel
Case History
-
10-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
30-Mar-2026
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
10-Mar-2026
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
09-Dec-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
12-Nov-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
25-Oct-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
14-Oct-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
23-Sep-2025
Copy of DepositionView PDF
Summary In O.S. No. 94/2022 dated 23.09.2025, the Subordinate Judge, Attur rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding the validity and cancellation of a partition deed dated 25.02.2010. The court found the plaintiff's arguments lacking merit, noting the plaintiff had already accepted the 2010 partition document and cannot now challenge its validity on grounds of limitation. The case proceedings involved cross-examination regarding property boundary disputes and an official commissioner's survey report, which the plaintiff did not contest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Sep-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
02-Sep-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
26-Aug-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
09-Aug-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
06-Aug-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
27-Jun-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
24-Jun-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
29-Apr-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
25-Mar-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
19-Feb-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
14-Feb-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
04-Feb-2025
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
04-Feb-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
06-Jan-2025
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
13-Nov-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
16-Oct-2024
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
16-Oct-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
11-Sep-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
21-Aug-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
30-Jul-2024
For further Proceedings
Sub Judge, Attur
-
26-Jun-2024
For further Proceedings
Sub Judge, Attur
-
24-Apr-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
20-Mar-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
14-Feb-2024
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
14-Feb-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
24-Jan-2024
Part Heard
Sub Judge, Attur
-
19-Dec-2023
Copy of DepositionView PDF
-
19-Dec-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
29-Nov-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
10-Nov-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
11-Oct-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
12-Sep-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
11-Aug-2023
Additional Written Statement
Sub Judge, Attur
-
19-Jul-2023
Additional Written Statement
Sub Judge, Attur
-
21-Jun-2023
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Sub Judge, Attur
-
18-Apr-2023
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Sub Judge, Attur
-
07-Mar-2023
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Sub Judge, Attur
-
24-Jan-2023
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
07-Dec-2022
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
15-Oct-2022
Trial
Sub Judge, Attur
-
06-Oct-2022
Written Statement
Sub Judge, Attur
-
02-Sep-2022
Written Statement
Sub Judge, Attur
-
06-Aug-2022
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub Judge, Attur
-
19-Apr-2022
Ex-Parte Evidence
Sub Judge, Attur
-
11-Mar-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Mar-2022
Case filed
Registration No. 94/2022
Summary In O.S. No. 94/2022 dated 23.09.2025, the Subordinate Judge, Attur rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding the validity and cancellation of a partition deed dated 25.02.2010. The court found the plaintiff's arguments lacking merit, noting the plaintiff had already accepted the 2010 partition document and cannot now challenge its validity on grounds of limitation. The case proceedings involved cross-examination regarding property boundary disputes and an official commissioner's survey report, which the plaintiff did not contest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts