A. Jeyalakshmi vs Devi — 24/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(d). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 13th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTI070003842024
Next Hearing
13th March 2026
Filing Number
476/2024
Filing Date
20-12-2024
Registration No
24/2025
Registration Date
21-02-2025
Court
District Munsif Court, Tiruppur
Judge
17-Additional District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
A. Jeyalakshmi
Adv. Sundararajan M
Thilagavathy
Minor Srivanth rep by his mother A.Jayalakshmi
Minor Gogul rep by his mother Jayalakshmi
Respondent(s)
Devi
Pushpa
The Commissioner Tiruppur Corporation Tiruppur
Adv. Karthick B
The Tahsildar
Adv. Gowtham M
Hearing History
Judge: 17-Additional District Munsif
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-01-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Interim Orders
Case Summary In Original Case No. 24/2025 before the Additional District Court of Tiruppur, the cross-examination of the witness (first defendant's side) was completed on 23-02-2026. The court rejected the witness's testimony regarding a video recording's authenticity due to lack of proper chain of custody and admissibility under evidence law. The cross-examination of the fourth defendant was also completed, and the witness statement was transcribed, read back, and signed by the witness. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary In Original Case No. 24/2025 before the Additional District Court of Tiruppur, the cross-examination of the witness (first defendant's side) was completed on 23-02-2026. The court rejected the witness's testimony regarding a video recording's authenticity due to lack of proper chain of custody and admissibility under evidence law. The cross-examination of the fourth defendant was also completed, and the witness statement was transcribed, read back, and signed by the witness. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts