Rajesh vs Rani — 64/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Or.7, R.1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNTV060000892020
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
89/2020
Filing Date
14-08-2020
Registration No
64/2020
Registration Date
19-08-2020
Court
District Munsif Court, Mannargudi
Judge
1-District Munsif
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajesh
Adv. Thiru.S.Vijayan.,B.A.B.L.,
Respondent(s)
Rani
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 09-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 23-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Summary of O.S. No. 64/2020 (District Munsif Court, Mannargudi) This document records the cross-examination testimony of defendant Rani (DW-1) dated September 2, 2025, in a property dispute case. The defendant denies plaintiff Rajesh's claims regarding ownership of a land parcel (thava seth). Rani asserts her family has possessed the property for 30 years since 1987 when her father-in-law purchased it, and challenges the validity of an Inam Settlement document allegedly transferred to Rajesh. The case involves disputed land ownership, conflicting documentary evidence, and claims of fraudulent acquisition. No final judgment has been issued; this hearing records only witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of O.S. No. 64/2020 (District Munsif Court, Mannargudi) This document records the cross-examination testimony of defendant Rani (DW-1) dated September 2, 2025, in a property dispute case. The defendant denies plaintiff Rajesh's claims regarding ownership of a land parcel (thava seth). Rani asserts her family has possessed the property for 30 years since 1987 when her father-in-law purchased it, and challenges the validity of an Inam Settlement document allegedly transferred to Rajesh. The case involves disputed land ownership, conflicting documentary evidence, and claims of fraudulent acquisition. No final judgment has been issued; this hearing records only witness testimony. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts