A.Manova vs V.Christibel — 2/2012
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/o.7R1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTR090000402011
Next Hearing
09th June 2026
Filing Number
2/2011
Filing Date
22-11-2011
Registration No
2/2012
Registration Date
23-12-2011
Court
III. Additional District and Sessions Court, Poonamallee
Judge
2-Additional District and Sessions Judge - III
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
A.Manova
Adv. V.Rajachandrasekar
Respondent(s)
V.Christibel
V.John Wesly
J.Bilal Ahamed
S.Durairaj
P.Sathish
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Additional District and Sessions Judge - III
Evidence
Orders
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 21-04-2026 | Orders |
| 18-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 10-04-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: O.S. No. 2/2012 — I.A. No. 04/2026 Court: III Additional District & Sessions Court, Tiruvallur at Poonamallee Date: 29 April 2026 Outcome: Petition ALLOWED without cost. The 4th Defendant (S. Dorai Raj) sought permission to file additional documents late in proceedings, including sale deeds, bank statements, and payment receipts. The Plaintiff (Manova) opposed, alleging the documents were forged and subject to a criminal investigation. The 2nd Defendant raised procedural objections, citing a 13-year delay and absence of Section 65B certificates. The court permitted the defendant to produce the documents in the interest of natural justice, finding no prejudice to respondents and emphasizing that procedural hurdles should not prevent substantial justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: O.S. No. 2/2012 — I.A. No. 04/2026 Court: III Additional District & Sessions Court, Tiruvallur at Poonamallee Date: 29 April 2026 Outcome: Petition ALLOWED without cost. The 4th Defendant (S. Dorai Raj) sought permission to file additional documents late in proceedings, including sale deeds, bank statements, and payment receipts. The Plaintiff (Manova) opposed, alleging the documents were forged and subject to a criminal investigation. The 2nd Defendant raised procedural objections, citing a 13-year delay and absence of Section 65B certificates. The court permitted the defendant to produce the documents in the interest of natural justice, finding no prejudice to respondents and emphasizing that procedural hurdles should not prevent substantial justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts