MRS. GIRIJA DHRUVA REP. BY HER G.P.A. K.S. RAJAGOPALA vs H.M. RAMACHANDRA — 23/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section VII,R,1,CPC,R/W,19,Specific,Relief,Act,1963. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 13th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KACM510002662022
Next Hearing
13th March 2026
Filing Number
23/2022
Filing Date
27-06-2022
Registration No
23/2022
Registration Date
27-06-2022
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,NARASIMHARAJAPURA
Judge
1218-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NARASIMHARAJAPURA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MRS. GIRIJA DHRUVA REP. BY HER G.P.A. K.S. RAJAGOPALA
Adv. PRABHAKAR L SHETTY
Respondent(s)
H.M. RAMACHANDRA
JANAKI
ABHINAVA CHANDRA
KUMARI PRATHYAKSHA
H.M. SHIVASHANKAR
N.V. SRIMATHI
Hearing History
Judge: 1218-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NARASIMHARAJAPURA
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 27-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 21-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 20-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
| 06-02-2026 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Original Suit No. 23/2022 | Heard on 21-02-2026 The court examined witness testimony regarding property-related disputes and financial claims. The witness testified about communications with Raj Gopal, assertions regarding notice service, and disputes over document submissions and payment obligations. The court found inconsistencies in the plaintiff's claims regarding the complete amount owed (86 lakhs vs. 38 lakhs remaining) and recorded the testimony for further adjudication. Case adjourned for continued hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Original Suit No. 23/2022 | Heard on 21-02-2026 The court examined witness testimony regarding property-related disputes and financial claims. The witness testified about communications with Raj Gopal, assertions regarding notice service, and disputes over document submissions and payment obligations. The court found inconsistencies in the plaintiff's claims regarding the complete amount owed (86 lakhs vs. 38 lakhs remaining) and recorded the testimony for further adjudication. Case adjourned for continued hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts