Karuppiah vs Subramanian — 200096/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 27(c). Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNSV060001162017
Next Hearing
03rd June 2026
Filing Number
200096/2017
Filing Date
12-12-2017
Registration No
200096/2017
Registration Date
13-12-2017
Court
District Munsif Court, Devakkottai
Judge
2-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Karuppiah
Adv. Mr.N.Sekar
Respondent(s)
Subramanian
Shanmugam
Kaliammal
Hearing History
Judge: 2-District Munsif
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 24-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 16-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 09-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 01-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Karuppiah v. Subramanian & Others (200096/2017) Outcome: Petition dismissed with no order as to costs. Karuppiah sought to summon and examine a notary public to prove the validity of an unregistered sale deed dated 11/11/2003 executed by his brother in his favor, claiming the document was essential to his permanent injunction suit against ancestral property. The court dismissed the petition, finding that under Section 17 of the Registration Act 1908, unregistered documents cannot create property rights and examining witnesses cannot cure this defect. The court noted the suit had been pending since 2017 and that the document's validity would be determined at final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Karuppiah v. Subramanian & Others (200096/2017) Outcome: Petition dismissed with no order as to costs. Karuppiah sought to summon and examine a notary public to prove the validity of an unregistered sale deed dated 11/11/2003 executed by his brother in his favor, claiming the document was essential to his permanent injunction suit against ancestral property. The court dismissed the petition, finding that under Section 17 of the Registration Act 1908, unregistered documents cannot create property rights and examining witnesses cannot cure this defect. The court noted the suit had been pending since 2017 and that the document's validity would be determined at final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts