New Allwin Dyers Rep by its Prop.Ponnusamy vs SMV. Tex Rep by its Partners Sonai Murugan and Sonai Velayee — 230/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 22. Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 12th March 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTI040008052024

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Next Hearing

12th March 2026

Filing Number

595/2024

Filing Date

18-07-2024

Registration No

230/2024

Registration Date

31-07-2024

Court

Principal Sub Court, Tiruppur

Judge

5-Additional Subordinate Judge

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 22

Petitioner(s)

New Allwin Dyers Rep by its Prop.Ponnusamy

Adv. Nagarajan M

Respondent(s)

SMV. Tex Rep by its Partners Sonai Murugan and Sonai Velayee

Ayyanan sonai ,partner SMV Tex

Sonai Velayee Patner of SMV TEX

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Additional Subordinate Judge

05-03-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

26-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

19-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

12-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

05-02-2026

IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending

Interim Orders

04-01-2025
Copy of Judgment

OUTCOME SUMMARY: The petition for property attachment before judgment has been dismissed. The court found that the defendants' property was already mortgaged to Ujjivan Small Finance Bank (since January 2021), making alienation impossible. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to prove the defendants were attempting to sell the property or provide concrete evidence of such attempts, and therefore did not satisfy the stringent requirements under CPC Order XXXVIII Rule 5. No costs imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

OUTCOME SUMMARY: The petition for property attachment before judgment has been dismissed. The court found that the defendants' property was already mortgaged to Ujjivan Small Finance Bank (since January 2021), making alienation impossible. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to prove the defendants were attempting to sell the property or provide concrete evidence of such attempts, and therefore did not satisfy the stringent requirements under CPC Order XXXVIII Rule 5. No costs imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Principal Sub Court, Tiruppur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case