K PANNERSELVAM M/s.V.BALASUBRAMANI, S.NANDHINI,K.INDHUMATHI,L.UDAYARAJKUMAR,G.KAVITHA,V.VADIVELAN vs S Sathish — OA/418/2026
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 9. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: HCMA011010432026
Next Hearing
: -
e-Filing Number
15-04-2026
Filing Number
OA/74927/2026
Filing Date
15-04-2026
Registration No
OA/418/2026
Registration Date
29-04-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr.Justice K.KUMARESH BABU
Coram
Honourable Mr.Justice K.KUMARESH BABU
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Arbitration ( 9 )
Sub-Category
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) ( 4 )
Judicial Branch
ORIGINALSECTION
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K PANNERSELVAM M/s.V.BALASUBRAMANI, S.NANDHINI,K.INDHUMATHI,L.UDAYARAJKUMAR,G.KAVITHA,V.VADIVELAN
Respondent(s)
S Sathish
Suganthi S
The Sub Registrar
Hearing History
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K.KUMARESH BABU
FOR ADMISSION (SECTION 9 - ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT)
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-06-2026 | FOR ADMISSION (SECTION 9 - ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT) |
Orders
Case Summary: OA No. 418/2026 The Madras High Court granted an interim injunction restraining respondents S. Sathish and Suganthi S. from transferring, alienating, or selling a scheduled property. The applicant K. Pannerselvam established a prima facie case that the respondents borrowed money secured by depositing property title deeds under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 11.05.2023, and attempted to dispose of the property without repaying the loan despite dishonored cheques. The court found the balance of convenience favored granting the injunction to prevent irreparable hardship. Notice returnable in four weeks with case listed thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OA No. 418/2026 The Madras High Court granted an interim injunction restraining respondents S. Sathish and Suganthi S. from transferring, alienating, or selling a scheduled property. The applicant K. Pannerselvam established a prima facie case that the respondents borrowed money secured by depositing property title deeds under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 11.05.2023, and attempted to dispose of the property without repaying the loan despite dishonored cheques. The court found the balance of convenience favored granting the injunction to prevent irreparable hardship. Notice returnable in four weeks with case listed thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts