M.Natarajan K.J.PARTHASARATHY, Barsha Gurung,V.P.Parivallal vs G.Thangavelu Advocate - S.Arjun, J.Prithivi Counsel for Caveator — SA/355/2026
Case under U/s 100 of C.p.c Section 1. Next hearing: : -.
CNR: HCMA011561172025
Next Hearing
: -
Filing Number
SA/111134/2025
Filing Date
16-07-2025
Registration No
SA/355/2026
Registration Date
07-05-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr.Justice S. SOUNTHAR
Coram
Honourable Mr.Justice S. SOUNTHAR
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Suits ( 149 )
Sub-Category
Declaration ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
JUDICIALSECTION
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M.Natarajan K.J.PARTHASARATHY, Barsha Gurung,V.P.Parivallal
N.Kalamani
Respondent(s)
G.Thangavelu Advocate - S.Arjun, J.Prithivi Counsel for Caveator
Hearing History
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice S. SOUNTHAR
MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS
FOR ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS |
| 08-06-2026 | FOR ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary: SA/355/2026 The Second Appeal was admitted by Justice S. Sounthar on two substantial questions of law concerning an immovable property dispute. The court will examine whether the First Appellate Court's judgment was valid given the Power of Attorney (09.04.2001) and Sale Agreement (25.04.2001) allegedly failed to convey property rights under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and whether the court erred by ignoring the appellant's earlier title deed (31.01.2002) compared to the respondent's later title deed (13.06.2002). The matter was adjourned for four weeks with directions to obtain records from lower courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: SA/355/2026 The Second Appeal was admitted by Justice S. Sounthar on two substantial questions of law concerning an immovable property dispute. The court will examine whether the First Appellate Court's judgment was valid given the Power of Attorney (09.04.2001) and Sale Agreement (25.04.2001) allegedly failed to convey property rights under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and whether the court erred by ignoring the appellant's earlier title deed (31.01.2002) compared to the respondent's later title deed (13.06.2002). The matter was adjourned for four weeks with directions to obtain records from lower courts. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts