S.J. MOHAN KUMAR vs S.HARIHARA VENKATRAMAN Advocate - THIRU. R. SAMPATHKUMAR — 12/2023
Case under Codeofcivilprocedure Section Order7,Rule1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 01st June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTV010027092022
Next Hearing
01st June 2026
Filing Number
687/2022
Filing Date
06-12-2022
Registration No
12/2023
Registration Date
12-01-2023
Court
Principal District Court, Tiruvarur
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
S.J. MOHAN KUMAR
Adv. Thiru. J.Ganesan
Respondent(s)
S.HARIHARA VENKATRAMAN Advocate - THIRU. R. SAMPATHKUMAR
S.Kaliyamurthy
Adv. S.DEEPIKA B.Sc.,B.L.,
S.Narayanasamy
Adv. S.DEEPIKA B.Sc.,B.L.,
Ebinesar
Adv. THIRU. K. SADASIVAM
G.Sekar
Adv. THIRU. K. SADASIVAM
Sasikunar
Adv. THIRU. M. GANESAN
Arivazhakan
Adv. THIRU. M. GANESAN
Sekar
Adv. TMT. R. DHARINI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 23-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-01-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: O.S. No. 12/2023, Tiruvarur Court Date: 19.09.2025 Outcome: The suit (Original Suit) is dismissed. The court rejected the plaintiff's claim seeking declaration of rights and relief regarding ancestral property (identified as survey nos. 133/1A and 183/1A) based on an unregistered will. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient grounds for the claim, particularly regarding the validity of the will and the plaintiff's standing to challenge prior settlements and property divisions made in 1954. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: O.S. No. 12/2023, Tiruvarur Court Date: 19.09.2025 Outcome: The suit (Original Suit) is dismissed. The court rejected the plaintiff's claim seeking declaration of rights and relief regarding ancestral property (identified as survey nos. 133/1A and 183/1A) based on an unregistered will. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient grounds for the claim, particularly regarding the validity of the will and the plaintiff's standing to challenge prior settlements and property divisions made in 1954. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts