N.Santhamani vs Arumugam — 497/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(b),O-7, R-1. Status: Judgement. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTI040013822022
Next Hearing
25th March 2026
Filing Number
1084/2022
Filing Date
23-09-2022
Registration No
497/2022
Registration Date
26-09-2022
Court
Principal Sub Court, Tiruppur
Judge
4-Principal Subordinate Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
N.Santhamani
Adv. Selvaraj E
K.Sarojini
S.Palanisamy
S.Varatharaj
G.Poongodi
Respondent(s)
Arumugam
Suruthi
Saravanan
Gokilavani
Nagaraj
G.Amutha
Megavarshini
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Principal Subordinate Judge
Judgement
Judgement
Judgement
Arguments
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Judgement |
| 13-02-2026 | Judgement |
| 02-02-2026 | Judgement |
| 06-01-2026 | Arguments |
| 08-12-2025 | Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: OS No. 497/2022 | Date: 15.10.2025 | Court: Tiruppur (Tamil Nadu) Outcome: The court completed examination of PW-1 (Sarojini) and cross-examination by defendants' counsel on 15.10.2025. The witness testified regarding ownership of a Thava (water tank) site located at Mariamman Temple Street in the disputed property. The witness claimed the property belongs to her family and provided documents including photos and tax receipts. The court found inconsistencies in the witness's testimony regarding property possession, tax payment dates, and conflicting accounts about ancestral ownership claims. No final order/judgment was pronounced—the case appears to be in ongoing evidence stage with examination of witness statements recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: OS No. 497/2022 | Date: 15.10.2025 | Court: Tiruppur (Tamil Nadu) Outcome: The court completed examination of PW-1 (Sarojini) and cross-examination by defendants' counsel on 15.10.2025. The witness testified regarding ownership of a Thava (water tank) site located at Mariamman Temple Street in the disputed property. The witness claimed the property belongs to her family and provided documents including photos and tax receipts. The court found inconsistencies in the witness's testimony regarding property possession, tax payment dates, and conflicting accounts about ancestral ownership claims. No final order/judgment was pronounced—the case appears to be in ongoing evidence stage with examination of witness statements recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts