VENKATALAKSHMI vs MULUBAGALAPPA — 80/2017

Case under U/o 20 Rule 12 and 18 R/w Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. Status: NOTICE. Next hearing: 07th April 2026.

FDP - Final Decree Proceedings

CNR: KABC010166112017

NOTICE

Next Hearing

07th April 2026

Filing Number

79/2017

Filing Date

06-07-2017

Registration No

80/2017

Registration Date

06-07-2017

Court

PRL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

Judge

6-CCH13 V ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

Acts & Sections

U/O 20 RULE 12 AND 18 R/W SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Petitioner(s)

VENKATALAKSHMI

Adv. C V ANNAIAH

Respondent(s)

MULUBAGALAPPA

NAGARAJ

KRISHNA MURTHY

MUNIRAJA

ANJINAMMA SINCE DIED HER LEGAL HEIRS OF a ANJNAPPA M P

Hearing History

Judge: 6-CCH13 V ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE

06-03-2026

NOTICE

10-02-2026

ORDERS

06-01-2026

HEARING

24-11-2025

HEARING

06-11-2025

HEARING

Interim Orders

04-07-2024
Orders
06-03-2026
Orders

Summary: The court accepted the Court Commissioner's report finding that the suit schedule property (a house measuring 36×48 feet) cannot be physically divided into 6 equal shares by metes and bounds. The petition (I.A.No.X) filed by petitioner Smt. Venkatalakshmi under Section 151 CPC to sell the property through public auction was allowed, and the court ordered the suit schedule property to be auctioned. The sale proceeds will be divided among all six shareholders according to their respective 1/6th shares as per the preliminary decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court accepted the Court Commissioner's report finding that the suit schedule property (a house measuring 36×48 feet) cannot be physically divided into 6 equal shares by metes and bounds. The petition (I.A.No.X) filed by petitioner Smt. Venkatalakshmi under Section 151 CPC to sell the property through public auction was allowed, and the court ordered the suit schedule property to be auctioned. The sale proceeds will be divided among all six shareholders according to their respective 1/6th shares as per the preliminary decree. 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