GOPINATH(DIED) M/S.T.R.RAJARAMAN, P.THIYAGARAJAN,MEMORANDUM OF AMENDED GROUNDS FILED ON 10/07/2023 USR21527,SOLE APPELLANT - DIED (STEPS TAKEN) vs S.PONNAMMAL (DIED) — SA/1679/2003

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMD012858762017

Filing Number

SA/1001679/2003

Filing Date

13-Oct-2003

Registration No

SA/1679/2003

Registration Date

21-Feb-2003

Judge

Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

Coram

Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

Category

Suits ( 149 )

Sub-Category

Declaration ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GOPINATH(DIED) M/S.T.R.RAJARAMAN, P.THIYAGARAJAN,MEMORANDUM OF AMENDED GROUNDS FILED ON 10/07/2023 USR21527,SOLE APPELLANT - DIED (STEPS TAKEN)

  2. 2.N.LEELAVATHY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.S.PONNAMMAL (DIED)

    Adv. FOR R2 & R3,M/S.D.NALLATHAMBI,V.MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM FOR R4 TO R8,R1 - DIED (STEPS TAKEN) 1123

  2. 2.T N E B

  3. 3.JUNIOR ENGINEER DISTRIBUTION

  4. 4.S. KUMARASAMY,

  5. 5.S. SURIYANARAYAN,

  6. 6.V. GOMATHI,

  7. 7.T. JEYANAYAGAM,

  8. 8.S. SOMASUNTHARAM,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    Honourable Ms.Justice R. PoornimaView PDF

    Case Summary: SA/1679/2003 and related appeals The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed all three second appeals concerning a property dispute over a boundary wall between neighboring properties in Tirunelveli. The court affirmed lower court findings that Gopinath, not Ponnammal (plaintiff), owns the disputed wall. The judgment found Ponnammal failed to establish title or exclusive possession; Gopinath's documentary evidence (including partition decree and sale deeds explicitly mentioning the wall) was superior. The court declined mandatory injunction relief as unproven and improperly directed. The legal heirs are barred from altering the wall's current structure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    For Pronouncing Judgment

    Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

  4. 16-Mar-2026

    Second Appeal Cases

    Honourable Ms.Justice R. Poornima

  5. 14-Feb-2024

    Final Hearing Cases

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

  6. 31-Aug-2023

    Final Hearing Cases

    Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy

  7. 30-Jun-2023

    Miscellaneous Petitions

    Honourable Mr Justice P.velmurugan

  8. 03-Feb-2022

    Final Hearing Cases

    Honourable Mrs Justice S.srimathy

  9. 10-Dec-2021

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 13-Oct-2003

    Case filed

    Registration No. SA/1679/2003

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: SA/1679/2003 and related appeals The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed all three second appeals concerning a property dispute over a boundary wall between neighboring properties in Tirunelveli. The court affirmed lower court findings that Gopinath, not Ponnammal (plaintiff), owns the disputed wall. The judgment found Ponnammal failed to establish title or exclusive possession; Gopinath's documentary evidence (including partition decree and sale deeds explicitly mentioning the wall) was superior. The court declined mandatory injunction relief as unproven and improperly directed. The legal heirs are barred from altering the wall's current structure. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case