Smt.Surekha Dadasab alias Dadasaheb Desai vs Sri.Yallappa Shidamalappa Gubachi Advocate - P.N. KHATAWAKAR — 81/2020
Case under U Order 7 Rule of 1 and 2 Cpc Section 00. Status: ORDER. Next hearing: 26th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KABK610005182020
Next Hearing
26th March 2026
Filing Number
81/2020
Filing Date
04-06-2020
Registration No
81/2020
Registration Date
04-06-2020
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, BANAHATTI
Judge
579-Civil Judge and JMFC Banahatti
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt.Surekha Dadasab alias Dadasaheb Desai
Adv. HARSHWARDHAN RAMCHANDRA PATWARDHAN
Sri.Sagar S/o.Dadasab alias Dadasaheb Desai
Smt.Shubhangi alias Shubhangini W/o.Abhijeet Desai
Siddanth S/o.Abhijeet Desai Minor Rep. by his mother Shubhangini Desai
Sri.Krishnagouda S/o.Allappa Desai
Respondent(s)
Sri.Yallappa Shidamalappa Gubachi Advocate - P.N. KHATAWAKAR
Sri.Nyamadeva Yallappa Gubachi
Sri.Arun S/o.Yallappa Gubachi
Sri.Maruti S/o.Yallappa Gubachi
Hearing History
Judge: 579-Civil Judge and JMFC Banahatti
ORDER
HEARING
objection
objection
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | ORDER |
| 09-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 06-03-2026 | objection |
| 05-03-2026 | objection |
| 25-02-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Order Summary Case: O.S No. 81/2020 | Civil Judge & JMFC, Banahatti | Dated 10 December 2024 Outcome: Temporary injunction application (I.A No. 1) rejected. The court found plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for restraining defendants from cutting trees on disputed agricultural lands in Hanagandi village. The judge noted plaintiffs did not provide adequate description of the trees and must prove their lawful possession and the trees' existence during full trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Order Summary Case: O.S No. 81/2020 | Civil Judge & JMFC, Banahatti | Dated 10 December 2024 Outcome: Temporary injunction application (I.A No. 1) rejected. The court found plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for restraining defendants from cutting trees on disputed agricultural lands in Hanagandi village. The judge noted plaintiffs did not provide adequate description of the trees and must prove their lawful possession and the trees' existence during full trial. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts