V.S.NATESHWAR vs P.SARAVANAN Advocate - ANISHA — 44/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 27(C). Status: IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
OS - Original Suit
CNR: TNVL230000782023
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
98/2023
Filing Date
20-03-2023
Registration No
44/2023
Registration Date
05-04-2023
Court
District Munsif Court, Katpadi
Judge
1-District Munsif,Katpadi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
V.S.NATESHWAR
Adv. KANCHANA ARIVAZHAGAN J
V.G.SHANMUGAM
Adv. KANCHANA ARIVAZHAGAN J
S.KAVITHA ALISE SATHIYADEVI
Adv. KANCHANA ARIVAZHAGAN J
Respondent(s)
P.SARAVANAN Advocate - ANISHA
ARAVINTH
Adv. ANISHA
THE COMMISSIONER, VELLORE.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, VELLORE-1.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif,Katpadi
IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | IA / EA Pending / CMP Pending / CRP Pending / CMA Pending |
| 08-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 01-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
This is a witness deposition record (PW1) in OS No. 44/2023 before the District Munsif Court, Katpadi, dated September 16, 2025. The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving building construction in Vellore, alleging that the defendant constructed a house with insufficient setback (1.5-2 feet instead of required 3 feet) in violation of Tamil Nadu Building Rules 2019 Rule 35, and that a criminal case (CSR) was filed. The court recorded the witness's cross-examination statements and found no further cross-examination was required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
This is a witness deposition record (PW1) in OS No. 44/2023 before the District Munsif Court, Katpadi, dated September 16, 2025. The witness testified regarding a property dispute involving building construction in Vellore, alleging that the defendant constructed a house with insufficient setback (1.5-2 feet instead of required 3 feet) in violation of Tamil Nadu Building Rules 2019 Rule 35, and that a criminal case (CSR) was filed. The court recorded the witness's cross-examination statements and found no further cross-examination was required. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts