Karuppannan vs GOVINDHAN AND 8 OTHERS Advocate - ALAGESAN N — 143/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1-6. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 16th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA170002162022
Next Hearing
16th April 2026
Filing Number
288/2022
Filing Date
13-09-2022
Registration No
143/2022
Registration Date
13-09-2022
Court
District Munisf Court, Mettur
Judge
2-District Munsif, Mettur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Karuppannan
Adv. V.VAITHILINGAM
Respondent(s)
GOVINDHAN AND 8 OTHERS Advocate - ALAGESAN N
Palaniammal
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Raja @ Adaikkappan
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Alamelu
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Jegadesan
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Radhika
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Jayaprahash
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Puvaneshwari
Adv. ALAGESAN N
Anandhan
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif, Mettur
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Trial |
| 29-01-2026 | Trial |
| 19-12-2025 | Trial |
| 03-12-2025 | Trial |
| 05-11-2025 | Trial |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: Karappanam v. Govinthan & 8 Others | District Civil Court, Mettur | October 7, 2023 Outcome: The petition for permanent injunction is ALLOWED. The court granted permanent injunction relief restraining the defendants from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property (Tavva Somaththu) that was legally transferred to the petitioner on November 29, 1990. The court found that the defendants have repeatedly trespassed on and attempted to encroach upon the property, thereby violating the petitioner's legal rights of ownership and possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: Karappanam v. Govinthan & 8 Others | District Civil Court, Mettur | October 7, 2023 Outcome: The petition for permanent injunction is ALLOWED. The court granted permanent injunction relief restraining the defendants from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property (Tavva Somaththu) that was legally transferred to the petitioner on November 29, 1990. The court found that the defendants have repeatedly trespassed on and attempted to encroach upon the property, thereby violating the petitioner's legal rights of ownership and possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts