RITA RANI vs THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE — 3583/2024

Case under U/o Vii Rule 1 of Cpc. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 02nd April 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KABC010132072024

EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

02nd April 2026

Filing Number

3590/2024

Filing Date

28-05-2024

Registration No

3583/2024

Registration Date

28-05-2024

Court

PRL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

Judge

4-CCH25 III ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

Acts & Sections

U/o Vii Rule 1 of Cpc

Petitioner(s)

RITA RANI

Adv. RAVISHANKAR S

AROCKIA DASS

GLORIA

Respondent(s)

THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANGARA PALIKE

ZONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER, BBMP

MARY WILSON

Hearing History

Judge: 4-CCH25 III ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE

16-02-2026

EVIDENCE

09-02-2026

EVIDENCE

30-01-2026

EVIDENCE

17-12-2025

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

19-09-2024
Deposition
27-11-2024
Issue
18-08-2025
Orders
30-01-2026
Deposition

Summary In case O.S./3583/2024, on 30.01.2026, the court examined the first witness (PW.1) and administered oath. The witness testified regarding property allotted to the plaintiff's grandfather in 1947, producing documentary evidence including an allotment list (Exhibit-2) bearing the grandfather's name. The witness further deposed that the plaintiff and family have been in continuous possession and occupation of the property since 1942, and that defendants 1 and 2 are now benefiting from the property which was originally allotted to the plaintiff's family. Further cross-examination is pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In case O.S./3583/2024, on 30.01.2026, the court examined the first witness (PW.1) and administered oath. The witness testified regarding property allotted to the plaintiff's grandfather in 1947, producing documentary evidence including an allotment list (Exhibit-2) bearing the grandfather's name. The witness further deposed that the plaintiff and family have been in continuous possession and occupation of the property since 1942, and that defendants 1 and 2 are now benefiting from the property which was originally allotted to the plaintiff's family. Further cross-examination is pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case