Abhinay Mehta vs Vignesh Babu — CRP/2192/2026

Case under U/a 227 Constitution of India Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010867262026

Filing Number

CRP/64146/2026

Filing Date

09-Apr-2026

Registration No

CRP/2192/2026

Registration Date

09-Apr-2026

Judge

Honourable Mrs.Justice T.v.thamilselvi

Coram

Honourable Mrs.Justice T.v.thamilselvi

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Civil Revision Petition ( 166 )

Judicial Branch

JUDICIALSECTION

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 14-May-2026

Acts & Sections

U/a 227 Constitution of India Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Abhinay Mehta

    Adv. T.N.Rajagopalan, ,D.Kanagasundaram,R.ANANTH

  2. 2.Abhishek Mehta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Vignesh Babu

  2. 2.Usha

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Honourable Mrs.Justice T.v.thamilselviView PDF

    The Madras High Court allowed the civil revision petition filed by plaintiffs Abhinay and Abhishek Mehta, finding that the trial court erroneously issued a mere notice order on their interim injunction application without considering prima facie facts. The court directed the trial judge to dispose of the interim injunction application within eight weeks and imposed a construction ban on the property during this period to prevent the defendants from making encumbrances or alterations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    Honourable Mrs.Justice T.v.thamilselvi

  5. 09-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRP/2192/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madras High Court allowed the civil revision petition filed by plaintiffs Abhinay and Abhishek Mehta, finding that the trial court erroneously issued a mere notice order on their interim injunction application without considering prima facie facts. The court directed the trial judge to dispose of the interim injunction application within eight weeks and imposed a construction ban on the property during this period to prevent the defendants from making encumbrances or alterations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case