M.Chinnasamy and three vs K P Kumarasamy and one Advocate - P.Vadivelsamy — 205/2022

Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section sec27(c). Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 20th April 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTI140002362022

Arguments

Next Hearing

20th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

256/2022

Filing Date

17-09-2022

Registration No

205/2022

Registration Date

17-09-2022

Court

District Munsif Court, Kangeyam

Judge

1-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

CodeofCivilProcedure Section sec27(c)

Petitioner(s)

M.Chinnasamy and three

Adv. P.Thangamani

K.Saminathan

Adv. P.Thangamani

P.Saminathan

Adv. P.Thangamani

D.Balasubramani

Adv. P.Thangamani

Respondent(s)

K P Kumarasamy and one Advocate - P.Vadivelsamy

K.Arunkumar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif

17-04-2026

Arguments

15-04-2026

Part Heard

10-04-2026

Part Heard

08-04-2026

Part Heard

06-04-2026

Part Heard

Interim Orders

17-04-2026
Copy of Deposition / Witness

Case Summary Case No. O.S. 205/2022, District Civil Court, Kangayam Date: April 17, 2026 This is a property dispute case involving land parcels (Plot Nos. 886 and 887) in Tiruppur district. The court recorded the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of a witness (Thangraj) who testified regarding boundary disputes and alleged interference with the plaintiffs' right of way. The witness testimony addressed conflicting accounts about land ownership, boundary demarcation, and whether the defendant unlawfully obstructed the plaintiffs' access to their property through fencing and physical obstacles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case No. O.S. 205/2022, District Civil Court, Kangayam Date: April 17, 2026 This is a property dispute case involving land parcels (Plot Nos. 886 and 887) in Tiruppur district. The court recorded the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of a witness (Thangraj) who testified regarding boundary disputes and alleged interference with the plaintiffs' right of way. The witness testimony addressed conflicting accounts about land ownership, boundary demarcation, and whether the defendant unlawfully obstructed the plaintiffs' access to their property through fencing and physical obstacles. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District Munsif Court, Kangeyam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case