M. Balamurugan vs R. Chezhiyan Advocate - A. Chithiraichelvan B.Com. B.L. — 135/2025

Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section U/Sec 27(c). Status: Trial. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTJ150001492025

Trial

Next Hearing

30th June 2026

Filing Number

154/2025

Filing Date

18-07-2025

Registration No

135/2025

Registration Date

18-07-2025

Court

District Munsif Court, Thiruvaiyaru

Judge

1-District Munsif

Acts & Sections

COURT FEES ACT, 1870 Section U/Sec 27(c)

Petitioner(s)

M. Balamurugan

Adv. S. Jothivel M.A. B.L.

Respondent(s)

R. Chezhiyan Advocate - A. Chithiraichelvan B.Com. B.L.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Munsif

30-04-2026

Trial

26-03-2026

Issues

17-03-2026

Issues

11-03-2026

Issues

05-03-2026

Issues

Interim Orders

26-03-2026
Copy of Order
26-03-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary Case: I.A.No.339 of 2025 in O.S.No.135 of 2025 | District Court, Tiruvaiyaru | March 26, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED. The court rejected the plaintiff's request for temporary injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the property. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish the three essential conditions required for granting interim relief: (1) a prima facie case, (2) balance of convenience in plaintiff's favor, and (3) irreparable loss if relief is not granted. Notably, the plaintiff could not provide documentary evidence proving continuous possession of the land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case: I.A.No.339 of 2025 in O.S.No.135 of 2025 | District Court, Tiruvaiyaru | March 26, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED. The court rejected the plaintiff's request for temporary injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the property. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish the three essential conditions required for granting interim relief: (1) a prima facie case, (2) balance of convenience in plaintiff's favor, and (3) irreparable loss if relief is not granted. Notably, the plaintiff could not provide documentary evidence proving continuous possession of the land. 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, Thiruvaiyaru All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case