Y Nagappa S/o Late Ningappa vs Jasti Shrinivasarao S/o Late Jasti Venkateshwararao Advocate - J.N. VASANTH KUMAR — 66/2021
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 26. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 04th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KADG320013782021
Next Hearing
04th June 2026
Filing Number
66/2021
Filing Date
15-04-2021
Registration No
66/2021
Registration Date
15-04-2021
Court
PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARIHAR
Judge
252-PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARIHAR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Y Nagappa S/o Late Ningappa
Adv. Nagaraja Halawagala
Respondent(s)
Jasti Shrinivasarao S/o Late Jasti Venkateshwararao Advocate - J.N. VASANTH KUMAR
Hearing History
Judge: 252-PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARIHAR
HEARING
ORDERS CIVIL
ORDERS CIVIL
ORDERS CIVIL
ORDERS CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | HEARING |
| 27-04-2026 | ORDERS CIVIL |
| 24-04-2026 | ORDERS CIVIL |
| 02-04-2026 | ORDERS CIVIL |
| 26-03-2026 | ORDERS CIVIL |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 66/2021 Petitioner: Y Nagappa S/o Late Ningappa Respondent: Jasti Shrinivasarao (represented by Advocate J.N. Vasanth Kumar) Court: Principal Civil Judge & J.A.F.C., Harihar Outcome: Witness examination was conducted on 24.06.2023. The petitioner testified regarding disputed property (Survey No. 33 and Survey No. 79) involving approximately 5-6 acres of land, stating he lacks knowledge of various property details, survey records, attachments, and documentation filed with revenue authorities. The court found no further cross-examination was required and case proceedings continued with witness testimony recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 66/2021 Petitioner: Y Nagappa S/o Late Ningappa Respondent: Jasti Shrinivasarao (represented by Advocate J.N. Vasanth Kumar) Court: Principal Civil Judge & J.A.F.C., Harihar Outcome: Witness examination was conducted on 24.06.2023. The petitioner testified regarding disputed property (Survey No. 33 and Survey No. 79) involving approximately 5-6 acres of land, stating he lacks knowledge of various property details, survey records, attachments, and documentation filed with revenue authorities. The court found no further cross-examination was required and case proceedings continued with witness testimony recorded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts