Natrajan vs Thangasamy — CMP(MD)/3969/2026

Case under U/s 5 Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ORDERED on 19th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMD010359252026

Filing Number

CMP(MD)/21827/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

CMP(MD)/3969/2026

Registration Date

24-Mar-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

Bench Type

Single Bench

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

19-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ORDERED

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

U/s 5 Limitation Act Section 5

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Natrajan

    Adv. B. SENTHILKUMAR,S. Lijiraj ,S. Lijiraj , M. Jegan ,S. Lijiraj

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Thangasamy

    Adv. R5 - POSTAL RECEIPT & TRACK CONSIGNMENT - ITEM DELIVERED,--------------,PVT. NOTICE - PROOF FILED,R5 - TAPAL RETURNED - ADDRESSEE LEFT WITHOUT INSTRUCTION,R4 - VEERAMMAL,R3 - CHINTHAMANI,R2 - PANCHAVARNAM,----------,COURT NOTICE,FOR R1 SR. 14115 DT 08.04.2026 ,A.ABDUL HAMEED,R.RAJA,M/S. J. BARATHAN 1123

  2. 2.Panchavarnam

  3. 3.Chinthamani

  4. 4.Veerammal

  5. 5.Velu

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. BalajiView PDF

    The court allowed Natrajan's petition to condone a 1-day delay in filing a Second Appeal. Justice P.B. Balaji found sufficient cause after reviewing the supporting affidavit and hearing counsel, with no serious objection from the first respondent. The Registry was directed to number the Second Appeal if otherwise in order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Miscellaneous Admission

    Honourable Mr Justice P.B. Balaji

  4. 27-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CMP(MD)/3969/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Natrajan's petition to condone a 1-day delay in filing a Second Appeal. Justice P.B. Balaji found sufficient cause after reviewing the supporting affidavit and hearing counsel, with no serious objection from the first respondent. The Registry was directed to number the Second Appeal if otherwise in order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case