Kumaresan vs Dhanam — 49/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 27(c). Status: Amendment. Next hearing: 03rd June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSV080000562022
Next Hearing
03rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
79/2022
Filing Date
12-08-2022
Registration No
49/2022
Registration Date
12-08-2022
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Manamadurai
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kumaresan
Adv. Tr.P.Jeevanandham
Respondent(s)
Dhanam
The District Collector
The Tashildhar officer
The Regional Development officer
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Amendment
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
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 20-04-2026 | Amendment | |
| 17-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 08-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 30-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 23-03-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The District Munsif Court in Manamadurai allowed the petition (I.A. No. 4/2026) filed by the petitioner seeking to add a fifth respondent (Muthumalinga) as a party to the original suit (O.S. No. 49/2022) under CPC Rule 10(2) and Section 151. The court found that adding the proposed respondent was necessary to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to serve the ends of justice, therefore granting the petition without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The District Munsif Court in Manamadurai allowed the petition (I.A. No. 4/2026) filed by the petitioner seeking to add a fifth respondent (Muthumalinga) as a party to the original suit (O.S. No. 49/2022) under CPC Rule 10(2) and Section 151. The court found that adding the proposed respondent was necessary to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to serve the ends of justice, therefore granting the petition without costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts