N.Saminathan vs K.Sornam Advocate - Mr.A.S.Chellappa — 38/2024
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 27(c). Status: Trial. Next hearing: 05th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSV060000512024
Filing Number
75/2024
Filing Date
12-Aug-2024
Registration No
38/2024
Registration Date
14-Aug-2024
Court
District Munsif Court, Devakkottai
Judge
2-District Munsif
Last updated 28-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.N.Saminathan
Adv. Mr.S.Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.K.Sornam Advocate - Mr.A.S.Chellappa
-
2.S.Pothumponnu
Adv. Mr.A.S.Chellappa
-
3.S.Backiyam
Adv. Mr.A.S.Chellappa
-
4.M.Kavitha
Adv. Mr.A.S.Chellappa
-
5.P.Renuga
Adv. Mr.A.S.Chellappa
Case History
-
05-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
22-Apr-2026
Trial
District Munsif
-
06-Apr-2026
Trial
District Munsif
-
23-Mar-2026
Issues
District Munsif
-
12-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
07-Mar-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
27-Feb-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
17-Feb-2026
IA orderView PDF
Case Summary: OS.No.38/2024 The District Munsif Court, Devakottai allowed a petition filed by defendants K. Sornam, S. Pothum Ponnu, S. Bakyam, M. Kavitha, and P. Renuka seeking to set aside an ex parte order passed against them on 21/10/2024. The defendants had delayed filing their written statement by 222 days, citing efforts to obtain revenue records related to property classifications. The court, applying the principle of "Audi Alteram Partem" (right to be heard), held that every person deserves a reasonable opportunity to present their case before a court. However, considering the significant delay, the court imposed costs of Rs. 1,000 payable to the District Legal Services Authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Feb-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
07-Feb-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
29-Jan-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
21-Jan-2026
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
13-Dec-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
10-Dec-2025
Lok Adalat
District Munsif
-
08-Dec-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
25-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
13-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
04-Nov-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
17-Oct-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
25-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
08-Sep-2025
Appearance
District Munsif
-
08-Sep-2025
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
District Munsif
-
18-Aug-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
02-Aug-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
03-Jul-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
04-Jun-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
24-Mar-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
04-Feb-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
13-Jan-2025
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
21-Nov-2024
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
21-Oct-2024
Ex-Parte Evidence
District Munsif
-
19-Oct-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
19-Sep-2024
Written Statement
District Munsif
-
13-Sep-2024
Appearance
District Munsif
-
14-Aug-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
12-Aug-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 38/2024
Case Summary: OS.No.38/2024 The District Munsif Court, Devakottai allowed a petition filed by defendants K. Sornam, S. Pothum Ponnu, S. Bakyam, M. Kavitha, and P. Renuka seeking to set aside an ex parte order passed against them on 21/10/2024. The defendants had delayed filing their written statement by 222 days, citing efforts to obtain revenue records related to property classifications. The court, applying the principle of "Audi Alteram Partem" (right to be heard), held that every person deserves a reasonable opportunity to present their case before a court. However, considering the significant delay, the court imposed costs of Rs. 1,000 payable to the District Legal Services Authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts