Karuppayammal and 2 others vs District Collector, Tamil Nadu Government and 7 others — 100059/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7R1cpc. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
OS - Original Suit (Title)
CNR: TNVR070001342017
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
100059/2017
Filing Date
23-08-2017
Registration No
100059/2017
Registration Date
23-08-2017
Court
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate No.I Court, Sattur
Judge
1-District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate No - I
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Karuppayammal and 2 others
Adv. A. Arunachalam
Ramachandran Asari
R. Murugan
Respondent(s)
District Collector, Tamil Nadu Government and 7 others
The District Revenue Inspector
Asst. Director
Revenue Divisional Officer
Tashildar
Commissioner/Taluk Development Officer,
Ravaneswaran
Adv. Kalidass
JeyaGurunathan
Adv. D. Baskaran
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Munsif -cum- Judicial Magistrate No - I
Evidence
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
IA Pending
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 06-03-2026 | IA Pending |
| 04-03-2026 | IA Pending |
| 03-03-2026 | IA Pending |
| 27-02-2026 | IA Pending |
Interim Orders
Case Summary I.A.09 of 2025 in O.S.No.59/2017 | District Civil Court, Sathyamangalam | March 12, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED The court rejected the petitioner's application seeking amendment (amendment of pleadings) to correct a survey subdivision error in the original case O.S.No.59/2017. The petitioner sought to rectify Survey No.14/2, claiming it was incorrectly subdivided to show a road through their property. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate due diligence in raising this issue earlier despite years of case proceedings and witness examinations, and therefore declined to permit the amendment under the Civil Procedure Code, Order 6 Rule 17. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary I.A.09 of 2025 in O.S.No.59/2017 | District Civil Court, Sathyamangalam | March 12, 2026 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED The court rejected the petitioner's application seeking amendment (amendment of pleadings) to correct a survey subdivision error in the original case O.S.No.59/2017. The petitioner sought to rectify Survey No.14/2, claiming it was incorrectly subdivided to show a road through their property. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate due diligence in raising this issue earlier despite years of case proceedings and witness examinations, and therefore declined to permit the amendment under the Civil Procedure Code, Order 6 Rule 17. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts