Smt. Shwetha vs Smt. Savithramma Advocate - K.B. DEVARAJA — 6/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section UnderSec,54,ofCPC,R/wOrder21,Rule35ofCPC. Status: Awaiting order from Higher Court. Next hearing: 16th March 2026.
FDP - Petitioner For Final Decree pr
CNR: KACM020005712019
Next Hearing
16th March 2026
Filing Number
6/2019
Filing Date
22-02-2019
Registration No
6/2019
Registration Date
22-02-2019
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, CHIKKAMAGALURU
Judge
215-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt. Shwetha
Adv. K.S. SHANTHIPRAKASH
Respondent(s)
Smt. Savithramma Advocate - K.B. DEVARAJA
Smt. Sunitha
Hearing History
Judge: 215-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM
Awaiting order from Higher Court
Awaiting order from Higher Court
Awaiting order from Higher Court
Awaiting order from Higher Court
Awaiting order from Higher Court
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Awaiting order from Higher Court |
| 25-02-2026 | Awaiting order from Higher Court |
| 07-02-2026 | Awaiting order from Higher Court |
| 19-12-2025 | Awaiting order from Higher Court |
| 12-11-2025 | Awaiting order from Higher Court |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chikkamagaluru allowed the petition and granted a final decree for partition of properties. The petitioner Shwetha, who had been allotted a 4/9th share in the earlier preliminary decree in OS.No.91/2017, was granted separate possession as per the court commissioner's report, which divided the properties among the petitioner, Respondent No.1 (1/9th share), and Respondent No.2 (4/9th share). The court accepted the commissioner's report and measurements without any objections from respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chikkamagaluru allowed the petition and granted a final decree for partition of properties. The petitioner Shwetha, who had been allotted a 4/9th share in the earlier preliminary decree in OS.No.91/2017, was granted separate possession as per the court commissioner's report, which divided the properties among the petitioner, Respondent No.1 (1/9th share), and Respondent No.2 (4/9th share). The court accepted the commissioner's report and measurements without any objections from respondents. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts