Hariharasudhan vs Thennarasu — 121/2025
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 25(b),27(c),27(d). Disposed: Uncontested--Rejected on 06th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSV030003162025
Filing Number
347/2025
Filing Date
21-May-2025
Registration No
121/2025
Registration Date
06-Jun-2025
Court
Sub Court, Sivagangai
Judge
3-Subordinate Judge
Decision Date
06-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Rejected
Last updated 10-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Hariharasudhan
Adv. MOHANASUNDRAM.M MMS OFFICE
Respondent(s)
-
1.Thennarasu
-
2.Tamilnadu Electricity Board,by Maravamangalam Assistant Engineer
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Apr-2026
IA orderView PDF
Court Decision Summary The Subordinate Court of Sivagangai rejected the original suit (O.S.No.121/2025) filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the CPC, finding it barred by the statute of limitations. The court determined that the plaintiff's claim regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot "B") was time-barred, as the cause of action arose from a 2006 deed partition but the suit was filed only in 2025, making it hopelessly barred by the Limitation Act. The court also found that the plaintiff lacked standing to assert rights in the disputed property, as acknowledged in earlier legal documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Apr-2026
Disposed
Subordinate Judge
-
10-Mar-2026
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
05-Mar-2026
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
20-Jan-2026
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
08-Dec-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
01-Nov-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
16-Oct-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
29-Aug-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
31-Jul-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
23-Jul-2025
IA Pending
Subordinate Judge
-
09-Jul-2025
Appearance
Subordinate Judge
-
06-Jun-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
21-May-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 121/2025
Court Decision Summary The Subordinate Court of Sivagangai rejected the original suit (O.S.No.121/2025) filed under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the CPC, finding it barred by the statute of limitations. The court determined that the plaintiff's claim regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot "B") was time-barred, as the cause of action arose from a 2006 deed partition but the suit was filed only in 2025, making it hopelessly barred by the Limitation Act. The court also found that the plaintiff lacked standing to assert rights in the disputed property, as acknowledged in earlier legal documents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts