Balan and 4 others vs Madhesh and 6 others Advocate - L.Ganapathy Subramanian — 196/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section OrVII.r.1-6. Status: IA Pending. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.

IA Pending Next hearing 03-Jun-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNSA170002622024

Filing Number

330/2024

Filing Date

17-Oct-2024

Registration No

196/2024

Registration Date

19-Oct-2024

Court

District Munisf Court, Mettur

Judge

2-District Munsif, Mettur

Last updated 08-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section OrVII.r.1-6

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Balan and 4 others

    Adv. SENTHILKUMAR. M. P.

  2. 2.Perumal

    Adv. M.P.Senthil Kumar

  3. 3.Munusamy

    Adv. M.P.Senthil Kumar

  4. 4.Govindaraj

    Adv. M.P.Senthil Kumar

  5. 5.Sekar

    Adv. M.P.Senthil Kumar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Madhesh and 6 others Advocate - L.Ganapathy Subramanian

  2. 2.Perumal

    Adv. L.Ganapathy Subramanian

  3. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate

    Adv. Government Pleader

  4. 4.The Sub Collector, Mettur

    Adv. Government Pleader

  5. 5.The Tahildar, Mettur

    Adv. Government Pleader

  6. 6.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchyath

    Adv. Government Pleader

  7. 7.The President, Navapatti Village Panchayath

    Adv. Government Pleader

Case History

  1. 03-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 10-Mar-2026

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  3. 06-Jan-2026

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  4. 13-Nov-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  5. 09-Sep-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  6. 24-Jul-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  7. 18-Jun-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  8. 15-Apr-2025

    Amendment

    District Munsif, Mettur

  9. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  10. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  11. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  12. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  13. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  14. 07-Feb-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Court Order Summary The District Civil Court, Mettur (dated February 7, 2025) dismissed the petition filed by villagers seeking to set aside an earlier judgment (A.S. No. 20/2021) and obtain a temporary injunction restraining defendants from blocking a public pathway. The court found that while petitioners established a prima facie case regarding the disputed road (Survey No. 330/17), they failed to demonstrate irreparable injury or that balance of convenience favored granting interim relief, especially since alternative routes exist for public access to government facilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  15. 07-Feb-2025

    Amendment

    District Munsif, Mettur

  16. 03-Feb-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  17. 01-Feb-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  18. 31-Jan-2025

    IA Pending

    District Munsif, Mettur

  19. 30-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif, Mettur

  20. 28-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif, Mettur

  21. 24-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif, Mettur

  22. 22-Jan-2025

    Written Statement

    District Munsif, Mettur

  23. 21-Jan-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  24. 21-Jan-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  25. 21-Jan-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  26. 21-Jan-2025

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

  27. 21-Jan-2025

    For further Proceedings

    District Munsif, Mettur

  28. 20-Nov-2024

    Written Statement

    District Munsif, Mettur

  29. 19-Oct-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 17-Oct-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 196/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary The District Civil Court, Mettur (dated February 7, 2025) dismissed the petition filed by villagers seeking to set aside an earlier judgment (A.S. No. 20/2021) and obtain a temporary injunction restraining defendants from blocking a public pathway. The court found that while petitioners established a prima facie case regarding the disputed road (Survey No. 330/17), they failed to demonstrate irreparable injury or that balance of convenience favored granting interim relief, especially since alternative routes exist for public access to government facilities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case