G.Gunalakshmi and 2 others vs The District collector, Salem and 2 others Advocate - Govt. Pleader — 127/2023
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section U/o.7R1-6. Status: Issue of Service. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA170001582023
Next Hearing
15th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
216/2023
Filing Date
26-06-2023
Registration No
127/2023
Registration Date
01-07-2023
Court
District Munisf Court, Mettur
Judge
2-District Munsif, Mettur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
G.Gunalakshmi and 2 others
Adv. KULASEKARAN.S.N.D
G.Tamilselvi
Adv. KULASEKARAN.S.N.D
G.Haribaksar
Adv. KULASEKARAN.S.N.D
Respondent(s)
The District collector, Salem and 2 others Advocate - Govt. Pleader
The Thasildar
Adv. Govt. Pleader
Manimekalai
Adv. Govt. Pleader
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif, Mettur
Issue of Service
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Appearance
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 24-04-2026 | Issue of Service | |
| 20-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 20-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 15-04-2026 | Arguments | |
| 01-04-2026 | Appearance |
Interim Orders
This document is a cross-examination affidavit in a civil suit (OS No. 127/2023) before the District Civil Court, Mettur, dated 15.04.2026. The witness (a village administrative officer) admits to significant deficiencies in his investigation report—he failed to document dates of inquiries, did not properly investigate property ownership, and did not name or interview neighbors as claimed in his report. The court's cross-examination reveals the witness provided incomplete documentation and gave oral instead of written statements to the court regarding the summons. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document is a cross-examination affidavit in a civil suit (OS No. 127/2023) before the District Civil Court, Mettur, dated 15.04.2026. The witness (a village administrative officer) admits to significant deficiencies in his investigation report—he failed to document dates of inquiries, did not properly investigate property ownership, and did not name or interview neighbors as claimed in his report. The court's cross-examination reveals the witness provided incomplete documentation and gave oral instead of written statements to the court regarding the summons. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts