Govindappa S/o. Venkappa Tattimani vs Manjunath S/o Venkappa Tattimani Advocate - H D Dodamani — 77/2024
Case under U Order 7 Rule of 1 and 2 Cpc. Disposed: Contested--DECREED on 06th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KABK210008702024
Filing Number
77/2024
Filing Date
04-04-2024
Registration No
77/2024
Registration Date
04-04-2024
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDHOL
Judge
120-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MUDHOL
Decision Date
06th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Govindappa S/o. Venkappa Tattimani
Adv. Sri. I.H.Ambi
Paddawwa W/o Venkappa Tattimani,
Respondent(s)
Manjunath S/o Venkappa Tattimani Advocate - H D Dodamani
Bhagya W/o Manjunath Tattimani
Adv. H D Dodamani
Shrimanth S/o Jinappa Khangond
Adv. B R Doddatti
Hearing History
Judge: 120-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MUDHOL
Disposed
JUDGMENT
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 28-02-2026 | JUDGMENT |
| 21-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 18-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 13-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court decreed the suit for partition and granted plaintiffs equal 1/3rd share each in the agricultural properties. The court found that the suit properties are joint family properties (not ancestral), jointly inherited by the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 after their father's death in 1984, entitling each to equal shares. The sale deed executed by defendant No.1 to defendant No.3 in 2018 was held invalid and non-binding on the plaintiffs' share since defendant No.1 was not the absolute owner. The court ordered a preliminary decree for partition with directions for final decree proceedings under CPC Order XX Rule 18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Court Decision Summary The court decreed the suit for partition and granted plaintiffs equal 1/3rd share each in the agricultural properties. The court found that the suit properties are joint family properties (not ancestral), jointly inherited by the plaintiffs and defendant No.1 after their father's death in 1984, entitling each to equal shares. The sale deed executed by defendant No.1 to defendant No.3 in 2018 was held invalid and non-binding on the plaintiffs' share since defendant No.1 was not the absolute owner. The court ordered a preliminary decree for partition with directions for final decree proceedings under CPC Order XX Rule 18. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts