MANICKAM M vs KRISHNAN N Advocate - VARADARAJAN R V — 74/2022
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 25(b)25(d). Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTU070002252022
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
240/2022
Filing Date
28-03-2022
Registration No
74/2022
Registration Date
28-03-2022
Court
Sub Court, Vaniyambadi
Judge
1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANICKAM M
Adv. BABU T
Respondent(s)
KRISHNAN N Advocate - VARADARAJAN R V
VELU K
Adv. VARADARAJAN R V
KUMAR K
Adv. VARADARAJAN R V
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 17-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This is a deposition of witness Gulzar Begum (PW3, aged 49) recorded before the Subordinate Judge at Vaniyambadi, Tirupattur District on 24.03.2026 in OS.No.74/2022 under Chapter XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The witness was solemnly affirmed and her examination-in-chief testimony was recorded along with various documentary evidence (police complaint receipt, water bills, birth certificate, Aadhar and electricity records, village head certificate, and postal acknowledgments). Cross-examination was deferred and the statement was marked for identification by the judge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a deposition of witness Gulzar Begum (PW3, aged 49) recorded before the Subordinate Judge at Vaniyambadi, Tirupattur District on 24.03.2026 in OS.No.74/2022 under Chapter XXIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The witness was solemnly affirmed and her examination-in-chief testimony was recorded along with various documentary evidence (police complaint receipt, water bills, birth certificate, Aadhar and electricity records, village head certificate, and postal acknowledgments). Cross-examination was deferred and the statement was marked for identification by the judge. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts