Petchimuthu vs The Dharmapuram Adhennam Mutt, Rep by its Addheenakarthar Mayilladuthurai Advocate - R.Mariselvam — 415/2022
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 27(c). Status: Lok Adalat. Next hearing: 13th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTL060005752022
Next Hearing
13th June 2026
Filing Number
705/2022
Filing Date
03-09-2022
Registration No
415/2022
Registration Date
08-09-2022
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli
Judge
12-Principal District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Petchimuthu
Adv. Thiru.N.Vanamaharaja
Respondent(s)
The Dharmapuram Adhennam Mutt, Rep by its Addheenakarthar Mayilladuthurai Advocate - R.Mariselvam
Hearing History
Judge: 12-Principal District Munsif
Lok Adalat
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Lok Adalat
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-04-2026 | Lok Adalat |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 14-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-02-2026 | Lok Adalat |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: In O.S. No. 415/2022 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, heard on 28.10.2025, the court continued cross-examination of the respondent (Dharmapuram Adhennam Mutt). The court examined the respondent's claims regarding Survey No. 1096/7 property, property dimensions (approximately 2 acres), boundary measurements, revenue department records dated 12.07.2025, and documents from 20.06.2008. The court rejected several of the respondent's contentions regarding lack of documentation, property possession, and occupancy claims. The case was adjourned for continued proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: In O.S. No. 415/2022 before the Principal District Munsif Court, Tirunelveli, heard on 28.10.2025, the court continued cross-examination of the respondent (Dharmapuram Adhennam Mutt). The court examined the respondent's claims regarding Survey No. 1096/7 property, property dimensions (approximately 2 acres), boundary measurements, revenue department records dated 12.07.2025, and documents from 20.06.2008. The court rejected several of the respondent's contentions regarding lack of documentation, property possession, and occupancy claims. The case was adjourned for continued proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts