Balasubramaniyan vs M.Saroja — 47/2020

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 27(c),25(d). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNSV150002392020

Evidence

Next Hearing

16th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

50/2020

Filing Date

15-09-2020

Registration No

47/2020

Registration Date

15-09-2020

Court

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam

Judge

1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate , Tiruppuvanam

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section 27(c),25(d)
IA/8/2023 Classification : Adjournment Petition Section BalasubramaniyanSub registrar, thiruppuvanam
IA/9/2023 Classification : Adjournment Petition Section BalasubramaniyanM.Saroja

Petitioner(s)

Balasubramaniyan

Adv. Tr.S.Subbarayan

Respondent(s)

M.Saroja

M.Saroja

Sub registrar, thiruppuvanam

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate , Tiruppuvanam

30-04-2026

Evidence

09-04-2026

Evidence

26-03-2026

Evidence

10-03-2026

Evidence

05-03-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

03-07-2023
IA
03-07-2023
IA
02-01-2024
Miscellaneous
02-01-2024
Miscellaneous
18-01-2024
18-03-2024
02-01-2024
IA
02-01-2024
IA
10-03-2026
Copy of deposition

Summary: In case OS. 47/2020 dated 10.03.2026, the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Tirupuvanam recorded the examination-in-chief of the first defendant (Proja) who testified under Section 44(6)(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1869. The defendant's affidavit evidence was read out and acknowledged as correct in open court. The cross-examination of the defendant's counsel was adjourned at the request of the plaintiff's advocate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In case OS. 47/2020 dated 10.03.2026, the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Tirupuvanam recorded the examination-in-chief of the first defendant (Proja) who testified under Section 44(6)(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1869. The defendant's affidavit evidence was read out and acknowledged as correct in open court. The cross-examination of the defendant's counsel was adjourned at the request of the plaintiff's advocate. 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

District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case