Jothimani vs Servaran Advocate - Tr.M. Veerapandi for D1 to D3. — 10/2021

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 27(c). Status: Trial. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNSV080000102021

Trial

Next Hearing

02nd June 2026

Filing Number

15/2021

Filing Date

16-02-2021

Registration No

10/2021

Registration Date

16-02-2021

Court

Principal District Munsif Court, Manamadurai

Judge

1-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 27(c)

Petitioner(s)

Jothimani

Adv. Tr.R.Somanathan, Tr.S.Elangovan

Respondent(s)

Servaran Advocate - Tr.M. Veerapandi for D1 to D3.

Kaaliammal

Adv. Tr.M. Veerapandi for D1 to D3.

Muthuselvam

Adv. Tr.M. Veerapandi for D1 to D3.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif

09-04-2026

Trial

02-04-2026

Trial

12-03-2026

Issues

04-03-2026

Issues

20-02-2026

Issues

Interim Orders

26-09-2025
IA order
26-09-2025
IA order

Case Summary: Jothimani v. Servaran Advocate & Others (OS 10/2021) Outcome: The petition is admitted/allowed for further proceedings. The court found the petitioner's claims regarding disputed property ownership documents to have sufficient merit to proceed to trial, rejecting the respondents' preliminary objections on limitation and title grounds. Key Finding: The court determined that four sale deed documents (dated 1965, 1968, 1973, and 1978) require substantive examination to determine their validity and the rightful owner of the disputed property, and that necessary parties must be brought before the court to resolve the property title dispute conclusively. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Jothimani v. Servaran Advocate & Others (OS 10/2021) Outcome: The petition is admitted/allowed for further proceedings. The court found the petitioner's claims regarding disputed property ownership documents to have sufficient merit to proceed to trial, rejecting the respondents' preliminary objections on limitation and title grounds. Key Finding: The court determined that four sale deed documents (dated 1965, 1968, 1973, and 1978) require substantive examination to determine their validity and the rightful owner of the disputed property, and that necessary parties must be brought before the court to resolve the property title dispute conclusively. 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

Principal District Munsif Court, Manamadurai All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case