Madhu @ Madhammal and 2 others vs Rangammal and 4 others Advocate - V. Ranadev — 189/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section O7R1to6. Status: Additional Issues. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSA170002722022
Next Hearing
24th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
363/2022
Filing Date
25-11-2022
Registration No
189/2022
Registration Date
25-11-2022
Court
District Munisf Court, Mettur
Judge
2-District Munsif, Mettur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Madhu @ Madhammal and 2 others
Adv. Sathiyapriya
Rajagopal
Seenivasan
Respondent(s)
Rangammal and 4 others Advocate - V. Ranadev
Krishanan
Adv. V. Ranadev
Perumal
Thangavel
Selvam
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif, Mettur
Additional Issues
Additional Issues
Additional Issues
Additional Issues
Additional Written Statement
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Additional Issues | |
| 02-04-2026 | Additional Issues | |
| 10-03-2026 | Additional Issues | |
| 23-02-2026 | Additional Issues | |
| 20-01-2026 | Additional Written Statement |
Interim Orders
Summary: The District Munsif Court at Mettur allowed the plaintiffs' petition to amend their plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. The plaintiffs sought to add a prayer for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove an alleged encroachment of 276 sqft on their property and restore vacant possession, discovered through an advocate commissioner's report filed in 2023. The court rejected the defendants' objections regarding limitation and contradictions in the commissioner's report, holding these matters should be decided in the main suit proceedings, and allowed the amendment in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The District Munsif Court at Mettur allowed the plaintiffs' petition to amend their plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. The plaintiffs sought to add a prayer for mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove an alleged encroachment of 276 sqft on their property and restore vacant possession, discovered through an advocate commissioner's report filed in 2023. The court rejected the defendants' objections regarding limitation and contradictions in the commissioner's report, holding these matters should be decided in the main suit proceedings, and allowed the amendment in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts