Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

O.K.Shanmugam Vs Arumugam(Died) 1.A. Namachivayam — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
O.K.Shanmugam Vs Arumugam(Died) 1.A. NamachivayamO.K.Shanmugam v. Arumugam(Died) 1.A. Namachivayam

Disposed¶36

O.K.Shanmugam v. Arumugam(Died) 1.A. Namachivayam

Madras HC22 Oct 2025CMP/8398/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim injunction against dispossession; suit schedule property; O.S.No.300 of 2008; judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019; IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani; A.S No.204 of 2019; C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019; Civil Miscellaneous Petition closed; main appeal ripe for final hearing; service complete; second appeal pending; Madras High Court; Dr. Justice A.D. Maria Clete; petitioners O.K.Shanmugam, Saranya, Minor Prethisha; respondents Arumugam (Died), A.Namachivayam, K.Vijayakumari, M.Mohanavalli, A.Bhuvaneswari, A.Rajeswari, Sundaram, S.Rajamani; R6 and R7 given up in the CMP; advocates T.MurugaManickam (Senior Counsel), S.Kaithamalai Kumaran, S.Lakshmanasamy, A.M.Esakkiappan, M.Rajeev Gandhi.

What did the court decide?

None; the injunction sought was not considered and the Civil Miscellaneous Petition was closed, the main appeal being ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so listed.

Why is it important?

The main appeal being ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so listed, and service in the appeal being complete, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed (the injunction sought was not adjudicated upon). ¶35

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the injunction sought was not considered and the Civil Miscellaneous Petition was closed, the main appeal being ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so listed.

Issue for consideration

Whether to grant an order of injunction restraining respondents 1 to 5 from dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property in O.S.No.300 of 2008, pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019, pending disposal of the appeal.

Court's answer

The main appeal being ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so listed, and service in the appeal being complete, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed (the injunction sought was not adjudicated upon).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (Dr. Justice A.D. Maria Clete), order dated 22-10-2025 in C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019 in A.S No.204 of 2019 (O.K.Shanmugam, Saranya and Minor Prethisha v. A.Namachivayam and others): The petitioners sought an order of injunction restraining respondents 1 to 5 from dispossessing them of the suit schedule property in O.S.No.300 of 2008 (IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani) pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019, pending disposal of the second appeal. Observing that service in the appeal was complete and that the main appeal was ripe for final hearing and had been ordered to be listed, the Court closed the Civil Miscellaneous Petition without adjudicating the injunction. No statute or precedent was cited.

A

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019 in

A.S No.204 of 2019

1.O.K.Shanmugam

2.Saranya

3.Minor Prethisha (Minor represented by father and Next friend O.K.Shanmugam)

... Petitioners

Vs

Arumugam (Died)

1.A.Namachivayam

2.K.Vijayakumari

3.M.Mohanavalli

4.A.Bhuvaneswari

5.A.Rajeswari

6.Sundaram

7.S.Rajamani

... Respondents

(R6 & R7 Given Up In The Cmp)

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019

PRAYER: To grant an order of injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 5 herein from dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property concerned in O.S.No.300 of 2008 on the file of IV Addl. District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani, pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019, pending disposal of the above Appeal on the file of this Hon'ble Court.

For Petitioners : Mr.T.MurugaManickam, Senior Counsel for Mr. S.Kaithamalai Kumaran

For Respondents : Mr.S.Lakshmanasamy for R1 Mr.A.M.Esakkiappan for RR2 to 4 Mr.M.Rajeev Gandhi for R7 No appearance for R5 & R6

ORDER

This petition has been filed to grant an order of injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 5 herein from dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property concerned in O.S.No.300 of 2008 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani, pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019, pending disposal of the above Second Appeal.

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019

It is seen from the records that the service has been complete in the

appeal. Since the main appeal is ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so

listed, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

22.10.2025

Tsg Index: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes / No

To

1.The IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019

DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J

Tsg

C.M.P.No.8398 of 2019

in A.S. No.204 of 2019

22.10.2025

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether to grant an order of injunction restraining respondents 1 to 5 from dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property in O.S.No.300 of 2008, pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019, pending disposal of the appeal.¶26
The court held
The main appeal being ripe for final hearing and ordered to be so listed, and service in the appeal being complete, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed (the injunction sought was not adjudicated upon).ratio¶35

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019 passed in O.S.No.300 of 2008, pursuant to which the petitioners sought restraint against dispossession pending the appeal; the decree is the subject matter of the pending appeal A.S No.204 of 2019.¶30
IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani · 27.02.2019
Prior proceeding
Suit O.S.No.300 of 2008 on the file of the IV Addl. District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani ended in judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019.¶26
Prior proceeding
Appeal A.S No.204 of 2019 filed before this Hon'ble Court against the said judgment and decree; pending disposal.¶26
Prior proceeding
Service in the appeal reported as complete.¶34
Prior proceeding
Main appeal ripe for final hearing and ordered to be listed for the same.¶35

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
O.K.Shanmugam¶8
T.MurugaManickam (Sr.), S.Kaithamalai Kumaran
petitioner
Saranya¶9
T.MurugaManickam (Sr.), S.Kaithamalai Kumaran
petitioner
Minor Prethisha (Minor represented by father and Next friend O.K.Shanmugam)¶10
T.MurugaManickam (Sr.), S.Kaithamalai Kumaran
respondent
Arumugam (Died)¶13
respondent
A.Namachivayam¶14
S.Lakshmanasamy
respondent
K.Vijayakumari¶15
A.M.Esakkiappan
respondent
M.Mohanavalli¶16
A.M.Esakkiappan
respondent
A.Bhuvaneswari¶17
A.M.Esakkiappan
respondent
A.Rajeswari¶18
respondent
Sundaram¶19
respondent
S.Rajamani¶20
M.Rajeev Gandhi

Coram

AI extract

Dr. A.D. Maria Cleteauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 22 Oct 2025 · October
Registered: 1 Apr 2019
Case no.: CMP/8398/2019
CNR: HCMA010607712019
Bench: A.d.maria Clete
Disposal: CLOSED
Case type: C.M.P.

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from A.d.maria Clete

A.Devaraj Vs Vasanthi
17 Oct 2025
Kolandasmay Gounder Vs Rangasamy
17 Oct 2025
Rajendran Vs Shanmugam
16 Oct 2025
O.K.Shanmugam Vs Arumugam(Died) 1.A. Namachivayam
22 Oct 2025
Parthiban Vs Valarmathi
22 Oct 2025
Gopal Gounder Vs Chokkammal(Deceased)
23 Oct 2025

Cite this judgement

O.K.Shanmugam v. Arumugam(Died) 1.A. Namachivayam, CMP/8398/2019 (MAD), decided on 22 October 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Procedural history5

Judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019 passed in O.S.No.300 of 2008, pursuant to which the petitioners sought restraint against dispossession pending the appeal; the decree is the subject matter of the pending appeal A.S No.204 of 2019.IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani · 27.02.2019
Suit O.S.No.300 of 2008 on the file of the IV Addl. District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani ended in judgment and decree dated 27.02.2019.
Appeal A.S No.204 of 2019 filed before this Hon'ble Court against the said judgment and decree; pending disposal.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Dr. A.D. Maria Clete

Parties & counsel