Muthuramalingam vs Valarmathi — 540/2019

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(6). Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 12th March 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNSV030009732019

Case disposed

Filing Number

825/2019

Filing Date

07-09-2019

Registration No

540/2019

Registration Date

19-10-2019

Court

Sub Court, Sivagangai

Judge

3-SUBORDINATE JUDGE

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(6)

Petitioner(s)

Muthuramalingam

Adv. MUTHURAMAN.T

Sonamuthu

Vellaisamy

Ganesan

Nagu

Ravi

Rajendran

Sharsagan

Respondent(s)

Valarmathi

Pandi

Chellapandi

Hearing History

Judge: 3-SUBORDINATE JUDGE

12-03-2026

Disposed

17-02-2026

Judgement

13-02-2026

Arguments

09-02-2026

Arguments

03-02-2026

Evidence

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case 540/2019 Summary Court's Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for declaration and permanent injunction regarding eight property items (parts of Survey No. 280/3, totaling 3.20 acres). The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their ownership rights to the disputed property parcels and could not provide convincing evidence that the settlement deed (2010), rectification deed (2011), and sale deed (2017) should be voided. The court ruled against all eight plaintiffs regarding their respective property items and rejected their claims to void the three deeds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Case 540/2019 Summary Court's Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for declaration and permanent injunction regarding eight property items (parts of Survey No. 280/3, totaling 3.20 acres). The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish their ownership rights to the disputed property parcels and could not provide convincing evidence that the settlement deed (2010), rectification deed (2011), and sale deed (2017) should be voided. The court ruled against all eight plaintiffs regarding their respective property items and rejected their claims to void the three deeds. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Sub Court, Sivagangai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case