Kamaraj and 2 others vs T.Murugaiah Thevar and other Advocate - Tr. K. Rajmahendran — 180/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or.7, R.1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 25-Mar-2026 this date has passed

OS - Original Suit

CNR: TNTS050002662023

Filing Number

368/2023

Filing Date

01-Aug-2023

Registration No

180/2023

Registration Date

01-Aug-2023

Court

Principal District Munsif Court, Tenkasi

Judge

6-Principal District Munsif

Last updated 11-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Or.7, R.1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kamaraj and 2 others

    Adv. Tr.R.Ganapathy

  2. 2.Esakkimuthu

    Adv. R.Ganapathy

  3. 3.Ramachandran

    Adv. R.Ganapathy

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.T.Murugaiah Thevar and other Advocate - Tr. K. Rajmahendran

  2. 2.Pitchammal

    Adv. Tr. K. Rajmahendran

Case History

  1. 25-Mar-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 05-Mar-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

    Summary: This is a witness deposition (PW3) in O.S. No. 180/2023 before the Principal District Munsif, Tenkasi, dated 05.03.2026. The witness, a police constable from Suranai Police Station, testified regarding five criminal cases (FIRs 355/2020, 361/2020, 499/2020, 585/2020, and 173/2023), providing information obtained from the CCTNS database. The court's cross-examination notes indicate that FIRs 355/2020 and 585/2020 were marked as bail cases, and ruled that the evidence (Exhibit 1) submitted without CCTV authorization should not be admitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  4. 24-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  5. 13-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  6. 10-Feb-2026

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  7. 10-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  8. 05-Feb-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  9. 07-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  10. 05-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  11. 17-Nov-2025

    Copy of DepositionView PDF

  12. 17-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  13. 13-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  14. 03-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  15. 10-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  16. 22-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  17. 02-Sep-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  18. 03-Jun-2025

    Trial

    Principal District Munsif

  19. 08-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  20. 19-Mar-2025

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  21. 09-Jan-2025

    Appearance

    Principal District Munsif

  22. 25-Oct-2024

    Appearance

    Principal District Munsif

  23. 30-Jul-2024

    Appearance

    Principal District Munsif

  24. 04-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Principal District Munsif

  25. 22-Mar-2024

    Issues

    Principal District Munsif

  26. 15-Feb-2024

    Appearance

    Principal District Munsif

  27. 05-Jan-2024

    Appearance

    Principal District Munsif

  28. 09-Dec-2023

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  29. 21-Nov-2023

    Lok Adalat

    Principal District Munsif

  30. 13-Oct-2023

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  31. 01-Sep-2023

    Written Statement

    Principal District Munsif

  32. 01-Aug-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 01-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 180/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: This is a witness deposition (PW3) in O.S. No. 180/2023 before the Principal District Munsif, Tenkasi, dated 05.03.2026. The witness, a police constable from Suranai Police Station, testified regarding five criminal cases (FIRs 355/2020, 361/2020, 499/2020, 585/2020, and 173/2023), providing information obtained from the CCTNS database. The court's cross-examination notes indicate that FIRs 355/2020 and 585/2020 were marked as bail cases, and ruled that the evidence (Exhibit 1) submitted without CCTV authorization should not be admitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case