Suresh S/o Kalasappa Kale vs Jayawant S/o Kalasappa Kale Advocate - D.M.JATTI — 5/2014
Case under U Order 7 Rule of 1 and 2 Cpc Section 0. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 25th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KABK700000232014
Next Hearing
25th March 2026
Filing Number
5/2014
Filing Date
09-01-2014
Registration No
5/2014
Registration Date
13-01-2014
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, JAMKHANDI
Judge
117-PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMKHANDI
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Suresh S/o Kalasappa Kale
Adv. P.V.KULKARNI,
Respondent(s)
Jayawant S/o Kalasappa Kale Advocate - D.M.JATTI
Smt.Rekha W/o Bharat Paranjape
Adv. A.P.KULAKARNI
Seetaram So Bharat Paranjape
Adv. D.I.Kalyani
Shashikant So Jayavant Kale
Hearing History
Judge: 117-PRL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC JAMKHANDI
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 06-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 23-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 18-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
| 12-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
Interim Orders
Summary In Civil Appeal No. 5/2014, the court heard arguments from all parties on 07-04-2025. After examining the witness testimony and cross-examination, the court found that the witness (DW-4) gave contradictory and false statements regarding property ownership and possession. The court concluded that the witness fabricated evidence at the instigation of Defendant No. 2(A) and that defendants No. 3, 5, and 6 were absent without representation. The case was adjourned without further orders on the main hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In Civil Appeal No. 5/2014, the court heard arguments from all parties on 07-04-2025. After examining the witness testimony and cross-examination, the court found that the witness (DW-4) gave contradictory and false statements regarding property ownership and possession. The court concluded that the witness fabricated evidence at the instigation of Defendant No. 2(A) and that defendants No. 3, 5, and 6 were absent without representation. The case was adjourned without further orders on the main hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts