G.Subramaniam vs Appusamy Advocate - Eswaramoorthy P — 117/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 25(d). Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 16th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNTI100001362016
Next Hearing
16th March 2026
Filing Number
117/2016
Filing Date
07-10-2016
Registration No
117/2016
Registration Date
07-10-2016
Court
District Munsif Court, Palladam
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
G.Subramaniam
Adv. Rajamanickam A
Respondent(s)
Appusamy Advocate - Eswaramoorthy P
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 16-02-2026 | Part Heard |
| 05-02-2026 | Part Heard |
| 21-01-2026 | Part Heard |
| 08-01-2026 | Trial |
Interim Orders
This document records witness testimony in Civil Case No. 117/2016 before the District Civil Court, Palladam. Witness G. Subramanian testified on January 21, 2026, regarding a property dispute involving alleged encroachment by defendants on plaintiff's land belonging to MRF Tire Company; the court admitted four plaintiff exhibits (power of attorney, purchase deed, patta document, and surveyor's map) and three court commissioner exhibits into evidence. Cross-examination by the defendants' counsel was deferred, and the witness statement was typed, read back to the witness, verified as correct, and signed before the judge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This document records witness testimony in Civil Case No. 117/2016 before the District Civil Court, Palladam. Witness G. Subramanian testified on January 21, 2026, regarding a property dispute involving alleged encroachment by defendants on plaintiff's land belonging to MRF Tire Company; the court admitted four plaintiff exhibits (power of attorney, purchase deed, patta document, and surveyor's map) and three court commissioner exhibits into evidence. Cross-examination by the defendants' counsel was deferred, and the witness statement was typed, read back to the witness, verified as correct, and signed before the judge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts