Murugan vs Ramani and 5 others — 400051/2017
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section 37(2). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNTM100001642017
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
400051/2017
Filing Date
16-06-2015
Registration No
400051/2017
Registration Date
07-07-2015
Court
Additional District Court, Arani
Judge
4-Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court),Arni
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Murugan
Adv. R.G.Srinivasan
Respondent(s)
Ramani and 5 others
Hearing History
Judge: 4-Additional District Judge(Fast Track Court),Arni
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 18-02-2026 | Evidence | |
| 11-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case No.: 51/2017 | Date: 04.02.2025 | Court: Fast Track Court, Arani This is a Tamil-language civil matter involving a property/family dispute. The court's order addresses testimonial evidence, witness statements, and documentary records regarding property division and family relationships. The judge (Additional District Judge C. Jayasree) analyzed conflicting claims about property ownership and family succession, ultimately ruling that certain witnesses (5th and 6th witnesses) cannot be relied upon as credible evidence, and rejecting arguments that property should be divided equally among all parties as claimed by one party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case No.: 51/2017 | Date: 04.02.2025 | Court: Fast Track Court, Arani This is a Tamil-language civil matter involving a property/family dispute. The court's order addresses testimonial evidence, witness statements, and documentary records regarding property division and family relationships. The judge (Additional District Judge C. Jayasree) analyzed conflicting claims about property ownership and family succession, ultimately ruling that certain witnesses (5th and 6th witnesses) cannot be relied upon as credible evidence, and rejecting arguments that property should be divided equally among all parties as claimed by one party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts