DINESH S vs PARVATHI S — 128/2021
Case under Court Fees Act, 1870 Section 42(a),25(d). Disposed: Uncontested--Dismissed on 10th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTU070003502021
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
375/2021
Filing Date
14-06-2021
Registration No
128/2021
Registration Date
25-06-2021
Court
Sub Court, Vaniyambadi
Judge
1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi
Decision Date
10th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DINESH S
Adv. VARADARAJAN R V
Respondent(s)
PARVATHI S
JAYA R
SOUNDERRAJAN R
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
SIVAJI M K
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
JAYARAMAN K
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
KUPPAN K
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
MURUGAN A G
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
THAVALJIRAO M
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
KANDAN D
Adv. SHIVAJI V V
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Subordinate Judge,Vaniyambadi
Disposed
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 06-02-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 08-12-2025 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 07-11-2025 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending | |
| 15-09-2025 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
Final Orders / Judgements
The Subordinate Judge's Court of Vaniyambadi dismissed the suit filed by S. Dinesh for specific performance, declaration, and permanent injunction against multiple defendants for default. The court found that despite sufficient opportunity, the plaintiff failed to appear, did not pay batta (court fees), and did not take private notice, resulting in dismissal in the interest of justice with no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Subordinate Judge's Court of Vaniyambadi dismissed the suit filed by S. Dinesh for specific performance, declaration, and permanent injunction against multiple defendants for default. The court found that despite sufficient opportunity, the plaintiff failed to appear, did not pay batta (court fees), and did not take private notice, resulting in dismissal in the interest of justice with no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts