K Sivakumar vs SivachalaGurukkal and 3 others Advocate - Kanaga Sundaram — 239/2019
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 7. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTI220002032019
Next Hearing
28th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
239/2019
Filing Date
14-09-2018
Registration No
239/2019
Registration Date
14-09-2018
Court
District Munsif and Judicial Magistrate Court, Madathukulam
Judge
1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K Sivakumar
Adv. Mohanraj R
Respondent(s)
SivachalaGurukkal and 3 others Advocate - Kanaga Sundaram
State Government - Special officer, karathozhuvu, Union Office
Adv. Ramakrishnan K
State Government - Tahsildhar , Madathukulam
Adv. Ramakrishnan K
State Government- District Collector, Tiruppur
Adv. Ramakrishnan K
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 30-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 17-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No. 239/2019 | Date: 19.01.2026 The court examined witness Anandhi (PW-2) and recorded her cross-examination by defendants 2-4. The court dismissed the first defendant's application to change the party name, ruling that no application was submitted by defendants 2-4 for this purpose. The court rejected arguments that defendants 2-4 were unnecessary parties and upheld their inclusion in the case. The witness's testimony was recorded in open court, transcribed, and authenticated with her signature and the judge's verification. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No. 239/2019 | Date: 19.01.2026 The court examined witness Anandhi (PW-2) and recorded her cross-examination by defendants 2-4. The court dismissed the first defendant's application to change the party name, ruling that no application was submitted by defendants 2-4 for this purpose. The court rejected arguments that defendants 2-4 were unnecessary parties and upheld their inclusion in the case. The witness's testimony was recorded in open court, transcribed, and authenticated with her signature and the judge's verification. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts