MALLIGA vs MUTHUPANDIAN (Died) — 180/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 37(2). Status: Ex-Parte Evidence. Next hearing: 02nd April 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTS080002302022
Next Hearing
02nd April 2026
Filing Number
248/2022
Filing Date
04-07-2022
Registration No
180/2022
Registration Date
21-07-2022
Court
Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil
Judge
2-Principal District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MALLIGA
Adv. EUGENE.F.X
Respondent(s)
MUTHUPANDIAN (Died)
Parameshwari
Adv. EXPARTE
Muvya
Adv. EXPARTE
Jegadeesh
Adv. EXPARTE
jebamani
Adv. EXPARTE
Sathiskumar
Adv. EXPARTE
JeiMurali
Adv. EXPARTE
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Principal District Munsif
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Ex-Parte Evidence
Amendment
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-03-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
| 19-01-2026 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
| 10-12-2025 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
| 23-10-2025 | Ex-Parte Evidence |
| 21-08-2025 | Amendment |
Interim Orders
Summary The court allowed three interim applications (I.A. Nos. 06/2025, 07/2025, and 08/2025) filed in Original Suit No. 180/2022. The District Court condoned a 429-day delay in adding the heirs of the deceased plaintiff (respondents 2-5) as parties to the case under CPC Order 22 Rule 9 and Rule 3 (Section 151), and permitted them to be impleaded as plaintiffs in the original suit. The court found that adding the legal heirs as replacement parties was necessary for complete adjudication of the case, notwithstanding the delay in filing the substitution application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court allowed three interim applications (I.A. Nos. 06/2025, 07/2025, and 08/2025) filed in Original Suit No. 180/2022. The District Court condoned a 429-day delay in adding the heirs of the deceased plaintiff (respondents 2-5) as parties to the case under CPC Order 22 Rule 9 and Rule 3 (Section 151), and permitted them to be impleaded as plaintiffs in the original suit. The court found that adding the legal heirs as replacement parties was necessary for complete adjudication of the case, notwithstanding the delay in filing the substitution application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts