PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH vs SATISH KUMAR SINGH — 48/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Status: ISSUES. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.
Title Suit
CNR: BRSR120000892022
Next Hearing
23rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
89/2022
Filing Date
28-02-2022
Registration No
48/2022
Registration Date
10-03-2022
Court
Sonepur Civil Division
Judge
1-Sub-Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH
Adv. SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH
Respondent(s)
SATISH KUMAR SINGH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Sub-Judge
ISSUES
ISSUES
ISSUES
ISSUES
ISSUES
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | ISSUES | |
| 09-03-2026 | ISSUES | |
| 02-03-2026 | ISSUES | |
| 19-02-2026 | ISSUES | |
| 03-02-2026 | ISSUES |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No.: Hakiquat Wad No. 48 of 2022 | Court: First Additional District Judge, Sonpur, Saran | Date: 10.05.2024 The court allowed the plaintiff's petition to appoint a Court-appointed Advocate (Advocate Ayukt) to bring the current status of the disputed property on record. The plaintiff alleged the defendant unlawfully constructed a building by collecting materials like bricks, sand, and gravel on the disputed land (Schedule No. 03). The court appointed Shri Mrityunjay Kumar as the Court-appointed Advocate with a fee of ₹3,000 to be deposited by the plaintiff, finding it necessary for proper adjudication of the case. The matter is adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No.: Hakiquat Wad No. 48 of 2022 | Court: First Additional District Judge, Sonpur, Saran | Date: 10.05.2024 The court allowed the plaintiff's petition to appoint a Court-appointed Advocate (Advocate Ayukt) to bring the current status of the disputed property on record. The plaintiff alleged the defendant unlawfully constructed a building by collecting materials like bricks, sand, and gravel on the disputed land (Schedule No. 03). The court appointed Shri Mrityunjay Kumar as the Court-appointed Advocate with a fee of ₹3,000 to be deposited by the plaintiff, finding it necessary for proper adjudication of the case. The matter is adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts