K.Jegajothi Periyakaruppan vs Rajaram Advocate - Mr.P.Muthaiah — 255/2019
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 37(2). Disposed: Contested--Partially Allowed on 22nd April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNSV160006132019
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
255/2019
Filing Date
19-09-2017
Registration No
255/2019
Registration Date
19-09-2017
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Singampunari
Judge
1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Singampunari
Decision Date
22nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Partially Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K.Jegajothi Periyakaruppan
Adv. Mr.M.Senthilkumar
Respondent(s)
Rajaram Advocate - Mr.P.Muthaiah
Nallakaruppan @ Karunanithi
Adv. Mr.P.Muthaiah
Neelavathy
Adv. Mr.P.Muthaiah
Rahini
Adv. Mr.P.Muthaiah
Marunthayee
Navamani
Adv. Mr.P.Muthaiah
Koppal
Adv. Mr.P.Muthaiah
K.Marunthayee
Adv. Mr.Vijayadevaraj
Oyyammal
Adv. Mr.Vijayadevaraj
Jeyamani
Adv. Mr.Vijayadevaraj
Jeyalalitha
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate,Singampunari
Disposed
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 21-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 20-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 18-04-2026 | Judgement | |
| 17-04-2026 | Judgement |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court decided that the plaintiff is entitled to a 1/12 share (not 1/2 as claimed) in ancestral properties (schedules 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7), while properties 2 and 4 are excluded from his claim. The judgment recognizes the properties as joint ancestral holdings that were temporarily divided among family members during the lifetime of the original owner, but no permanent legal partition was executed, making all legal heirs entitled to equal shares in the undivided estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court decided that the plaintiff is entitled to a 1/12 share (not 1/2 as claimed) in ancestral properties (schedules 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7), while properties 2 and 4 are excluded from his claim. The judgment recognizes the properties as joint ancestral holdings that were temporarily divided among family members during the lifetime of the original owner, but no permanent legal partition was executed, making all legal heirs entitled to equal shares in the undivided estate. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts