B.M. BALAKUMAR vs ARUN — 802/2025

Case under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 Cpc. Status: Cross of pw. Next hearing: 21st July 2026.

Cross of pw Next hearing 21-Jul-2026

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KABR700012452025

Filing Number

1236/2025

Filing Date

23-Apr-2025

Registration No

802/2025

Registration Date

23-Apr-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,KRISHNARAJAPURAM

Judge

1125-CIVIL Judge And JMFC

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 Cpc

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.B.M. BALAKUMAR

    Adv. C. SHANKAR REDDY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.ARUN

  2. 2.B.S.RAMANNA

Case History

  1. 21-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Cross of pw

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Evidence..

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    DepositionView PDF

    Case Summary: O.S. No 802/2025 In this civil suit, petitioner B.M. Balakumar challenged the validity of transactions involving agricultural land. The court heard testimony from PW1 on 05.03.2026 regarding disputed property transfers, including a General Power of Attorney executed in 1992 and subsequent sales of developed plots. The court found that the witness provided false testimony, specifically denying claims about cultivating crops on the property and acknowledging that false evidence was presented to harass the respondents. The case proceeded with cross-examination by the defendant's counsel, and no further examination was permitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Evidence..

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  6. 27-Feb-2026

    Cross of pw

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  7. 04-Feb-2026

    Cross of pw

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  8. 15-Nov-2025

    Notice

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  9. 19-Aug-2025

    Notice

    CIVIL Judge And JMFC

  10. 23-Apr-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 23-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 802/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. No 802/2025 In this civil suit, petitioner B.M. Balakumar challenged the validity of transactions involving agricultural land. The court heard testimony from PW1 on 05.03.2026 regarding disputed property transfers, including a General Power of Attorney executed in 1992 and subsequent sales of developed plots. The court found that the witness provided false testimony, specifically denying claims about cultivating crops on the property and acknowledging that false evidence was presented to harass the respondents. The case proceeded with cross-examination by the defendant's counsel, and no further examination was permitted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case