JAYA vs KESAVA REDDY Advocate - MOHAN RAJ S — 653/2009
Case under Suits Valuation Act Section 37(2). Status: Part Heard. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNVL230000022009
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
Filing Number
653/2009
Filing Date
09-09-2009
Registration No
653/2009
Registration Date
09-09-2009
Court
District Munsif Court, Katpadi
Judge
1-District Munsif,Katpadi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JAYA
Adv. GUNASEKARAN S
CHANDRA
Adv. GUNASEKARAN S
VIJAYALAKSHMI
Adv. GUNASEKARAN S
Respondent(s)
KESAVA REDDY Advocate - MOHAN RAJ S
SHANMUGIAMMAL
RAJINI
SHOBAN KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif,Katpadi
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Part Heard |
| 06-04-2026 | Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Part Heard |
| 23-02-2026 | Part Heard |
| 12-02-2026 | Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: OS 653/2009 Court: District Munsif Court, Katpadi, Vellore District Date: 24 November 2025 Proceeding: Deposition of witness (DW1) for defendant in an original suit involving property disputes regarding survey numbers, title deeds, and land subdivisions. Outcome: The witness deposition was recorded and cross-examination was deferred/adjourned pending clarifications. The court found discrepancies in property documentation, particularly regarding survey number 19/1 subdivision timing and missing proper survey number references in title deed P.W.S.A.1. The court noted issues with deed validity and directed further inquiry at appropriate revenue offices regarding land partition records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OS 653/2009 Court: District Munsif Court, Katpadi, Vellore District Date: 24 November 2025 Proceeding: Deposition of witness (DW1) for defendant in an original suit involving property disputes regarding survey numbers, title deeds, and land subdivisions. Outcome: The witness deposition was recorded and cross-examination was deferred/adjourned pending clarifications. The court found discrepancies in property documentation, particularly regarding survey number 19/1 subdivision timing and missing proper survey number references in title deed P.W.S.A.1. The court noted issues with deed validity and directed further inquiry at appropriate revenue offices regarding land partition records. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts