Selvaraj vs Vijaya @ Vijayalakshmi Advocate - Easwaran A — 100009/2012
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 21,35. Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 22nd April 2026.
EP - Execution Petition
CNR: TNTI100002672012
Next Hearing
22nd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
100009/2012
Filing Date
21-11-2012
Registration No
100009/2012
Registration Date
10-12-2012
Court
District Munsif Court, Palladam
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Selvaraj
Adv. chitrakala g
Respondent(s)
Vijaya @ Vijayalakshmi Advocate - Easwaran A
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
Orders
Orders
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 09-04-2026 | Orders | |
| 07-04-2026 | Orders | |
| 06-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 01-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed. The District Munsif, Palladam granted the petitioner's application (I.A. No. 3/2025) under CPC Order 16 Rule 1, permitting summons to be issued to the Sub-Registrar of Palladam to produce original registers (Book 3 for Will No. 2/1991 and Book 1 for Partition Deed No. 2690/1990) for signature comparison. The court found signature discrepancies between xerox copies of the will and partition deed and determined that comparing signatures from original contemporaneous documents (both from 1990) was essential to resolve the authenticity issue. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Petition Allowed. The District Munsif, Palladam granted the petitioner's application (I.A. No. 3/2025) under CPC Order 16 Rule 1, permitting summons to be issued to the Sub-Registrar of Palladam to produce original registers (Book 3 for Will No. 2/1991 and Book 1 for Partition Deed No. 2690/1990) for signature comparison. The court found signature discrepancies between xerox copies of the will and partition deed and determined that comparing signatures from original contemporaneous documents (both from 1990) was essential to resolve the authenticity issue. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts