Vijiya vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SALEM AND 2 OTHERS Advocate - CHANDRASEKARAN. K. — 185/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/Or.7R1to6. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 13th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA130003482024
Next Hearing
13th March 2026
Filing Number
445/2024
Filing Date
29-08-2024
Registration No
185/2024
Registration Date
29-08-2024
Court
District Munsif Court, Attur
Judge
2-Principal District Munsif, Attur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vijiya
Adv. Santhipriya.S
Respondent(s)
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SALEM AND 2 OTHERS Advocate - CHANDRASEKARAN. K.
THE THASILDHAR, GANGAVALLI.
Adv. CHANDRASEKARAN. K.
THE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, THAMMAMPATTY.
Adv. CHANDRASEKARAN. K.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Principal District Munsif, Attur
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-01-2026 | Arguments |
| 15-12-2025 | Arguments |
| 08-12-2025 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
This document records the deposition of witness P.W.-2 (Rajasekar, age 47) in civil suit O.S. No. 185/2024 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Attur on 25.09.2025. The witness affirmed his sworn statement regarding the plaintiff's case and underwent cross-examination by the defendant's counsel, during which he maintained that his testimony was based on facts and not biased support for the plaintiff despite being a relative. The deposition was completed and acknowledged as correct by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document records the deposition of witness P.W.-2 (Rajasekar, age 47) in civil suit O.S. No. 185/2024 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Attur on 25.09.2025. The witness affirmed his sworn statement regarding the plaintiff's case and underwent cross-examination by the defendant's counsel, during which he maintained that his testimony was based on facts and not biased support for the plaintiff despite being a relative. The deposition was completed and acknowledged as correct by the court. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts