Velammal vs The Thasildar, Devakottai — 51/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 25(d). Disposed: Contested--Decreed without cost on 25th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSV060000602022
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
77/2022
Filing Date
13-06-2022
Registration No
51/2022
Registration Date
13-06-2022
Court
District Munsif Court, Devakkottai
Judge
2-District Munsif
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed without cost
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Velammal
Adv. Tr.V.Sundar
Devappan
Chitravelu
Rethinam
Muthulakshmi
Suloksana
Arumugam
Kottaiammal
Muthulakshmi
Mariyappan
Saratha
Respondent(s)
The Thasildar, Devakottai
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif
Disposed
Judgement
Arguments
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | Judgement | |
| 03-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 24-02-2026 | Evidence | |
| 19-02-2026 | Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District Munsif Court of Devakottai partly decreed the suit and declared all 11 plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased Subbaiah (who died in 1992). The court rejected the plaintiffs' request to also declare deceased family members (Subbaiah's mother, first wife, and deceased son Balusamy) as legal heirs, reasoning that deceased persons cannot be declared heirs and that Balusamy's children were already included as plaintiffs. The court found the defendants' rejection of the legal heir certificate unjustified since the deceased's living children and grandchildren had valid claims to heirship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The District Munsif Court of Devakottai partly decreed the suit and declared all 11 plaintiffs as the legal heirs of deceased Subbaiah (who died in 1992). The court rejected the plaintiffs' request to also declare deceased family members (Subbaiah's mother, first wife, and deceased son Balusamy) as legal heirs, reasoning that deceased persons cannot be declared heirs and that Balusamy's children were already included as plaintiffs. The court found the defendants' rejection of the legal heir certificate unjustified since the deceased's living children and grandchildren had valid claims to heirship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts