M. Chitra vs Velammal — 77/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7,R1. Status: Trial. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTL080001432025
Next Hearing
18th June 2026
Filing Number
119/2025
Filing Date
01-08-2025
Registration No
77/2025
Registration Date
01-08-2025
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Vallioor
Judge
2-Principal District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M. Chitra
Adv. Thiru. S.Raja
Respondent(s)
Velammal
Sudalai
Esakkiyammal
Vennila
Vengatesh
Naveena
Esaiselvi
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Principal District Munsif
Trial
Trial
Lok Adalat
Trial
Trial
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | Trial |
| 14-03-2026 | Trial |
| 03-03-2026 | Lok Adalat |
| 21-01-2026 | Trial |
| 13-12-2025 | Trial |
Interim Orders
Case 77/2025 Summary Petition Dismissed. M. Chitra's application for temporary injunction to restrain respondent Esakkiammal from constructing on the disputed property was dismissed on 17 September 2025. The court found that the property was already allocated to Murugan (and subsequently to Esakkiammal through a 2017 sale deed) via oral family partition, and that Esakkiammal has been in possession and enjoying the property since 2017, evidenced by tax receipts and utility bills in her name. The court noted Chitra failed to file her partition suit promptly despite knowing of the respondent's possession and rejected her claim as lacking bona fides. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 77/2025 Summary Petition Dismissed. M. Chitra's application for temporary injunction to restrain respondent Esakkiammal from constructing on the disputed property was dismissed on 17 September 2025. The court found that the property was already allocated to Murugan (and subsequently to Esakkiammal through a 2017 sale deed) via oral family partition, and that Esakkiammal has been in possession and enjoying the property since 2017, evidenced by tax receipts and utility bills in her name. The court noted Chitra failed to file her partition suit promptly despite knowing of the respondent's possession and rejected her claim as lacking bona fides. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts