K. Manchegowda rept. by GPA holder H.K. Manoj vs K.T. Sridevi Advocate - K.M.PRASHANTH — 72/2023

Case under Motor Vehicles Act Section U/o.VII,Rule,1,of,CPC. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KACM410005962023

HEARING

Next Hearing

27th March 2026

Filing Number

72/2023

Filing Date

21-11-2023

Registration No

72/2023

Registration Date

21-11-2023

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,MUDIGERE

Judge

1217-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDIGERE

Acts & Sections

Motor Vehicles Act Section U/o.VII,Rule,1,of,CPC

Petitioner(s)

K. Manchegowda rept. by GPA holder H.K. Manoj

Adv. HAREESH SINGATAGERE

Respondent(s)

K.T. Sridevi Advocate - K.M.PRASHANTH

D.R. Duggappagowda

Adv. K.M.PRASHANTH

Hearing History

Judge: 1217-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDIGERE

06-03-2026

HEARING

20-02-2026

HEARING

24-01-2026

HEARING

08-01-2026

HEARING

28-11-2025

HEARING

Interim Orders

22-11-2023
Orders
13-09-2024
Orders
24-09-2024
Issue
28-02-2025
Orders
10-11-2025
Orders

Court Order Summary Case: O.S. No. 72/2023, Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mudigere Outcome: The court dismissed the defendants' Interim Application (IA No. VIII) filed under Order 7 Rule 11(b) of CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on grounds of improper valuation and insufficient court fee payment. The court held that such contentions regarding court fee cannot be decided at the plaint-rejection stage and must be determined during trial. However, the court allowed a separate application (IA No. IX) to frame an additional issue for trial on whether the suit was properly valued and adequate court fee was paid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: O.S. No. 72/2023, Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Mudigere Outcome: The court dismissed the defendants' Interim Application (IA No. VIII) filed under Order 7 Rule 11(b) of CPC seeking rejection of the plaint on grounds of improper valuation and insufficient court fee payment. The court held that such contentions regarding court fee cannot be decided at the plaint-rejection stage and must be determined during trial. However, the court allowed a separate application (IA No. IX) to frame an additional issue for trial on whether the suit was properly valued and adequate court fee was paid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,MUDIGERE All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case