KUMARI KAVANA H. P. D/O PRABHAKAR SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN GRAND MOTHER vs SMT. K. RATNAMMA W/O M.R. PRAKASH D/O LATE KESHAVAMURTHY — 472/2022

Case under Order 7 Rule 10 Cpc Section 1 and 2. Status: Evidence.. Next hearing: 14th July 2026.

Evidence. Next hearing 14-Jul-2026

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAHS410027022022

Filing Number

473/2022

Filing Date

12-Jul-2022

Registration No

472/2022

Registration Date

12-Jul-2022

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE

Judge

345-Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Order 7 Rule 10 Cpc Section 1 and 2

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KUMARI KAVANA H. P. D/O PRABHAKAR SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN GRAND MOTHER

    Adv. B. K. VIVEK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT. K. RATNAMMA W/O M.R. PRAKASH D/O LATE KESHAVAMURTHY

  2. 2.SMT. GAYATHRI W/O B.T. NAYAYAN D/O LATE KESHAVAMURTHY

  3. 3.K. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE K. KESHAVAMURTHY

  4. 4.K. MOHANKUMAR S/O LATE K. KESHAVAMURTHY

  5. 5.SRI. K. PRABHAKAR S/O LATE K. KESHAVAMURTHY

Case History

  1. 14-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  3. 15-Dec-2025

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  4. 15-Oct-2025

    OrdersView PDF

    Summary In O.S. No. 472/2022, the Court of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC at Arasikere granted a temporary injunction on 15 October 2025. The 16-year-old plaintiff (represented by her grandmother) sought to restrain five defendants from alienating, mortgaging, or encumbering ancestral joint family property. The court found a prima facie case that the property belonged to the joint family and that defendants were attempting to sell it in collusion to defeat the plaintiff's legitimate share. The balance of convenience favored maintaining status quo to prevent irreparable loss and multiplicity of proceedings. The defendants were permanently restrained from selling, gifting, leasing, or creating any charge on the suit property (Sy. No. 45/2 at Doddagatta Village) until final disposal of the suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 15-Oct-2025

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  6. 14-Oct-2025

    Orders

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  7. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  8. 17-Jun-2025

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  9. 19-Feb-2025

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  10. 27-Nov-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  11. 25-Sep-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  12. 31-Jul-2024

    DepositionView PDF

  13. 31-Jul-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  14. 11-Jun-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  15. 03-Apr-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  16. 05-Mar-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  17. 13-Feb-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  18. 08-Jan-2024

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  19. 21-Nov-2023

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  20. 06-Oct-2023

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  21. 12-Jul-2023

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  22. 30-Mar-2023

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  23. 12-Jan-2023

    Evidence.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  24. 24-Nov-2022

    Notice

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  25. 12-Oct-2022

    Notice

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  26. 15-Sep-2022

    Summons

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  27. 13-Sep-2022

    Orders.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  28. 09-Sep-2022

    Summons

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  29. 29-Aug-2022

    Summons

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  30. 15-Jul-2022

    Summons

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  31. 14-Jul-2022

    Orders.

    Prl.civil Judge And JMFC

  32. 13-Jul-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  33. 12-Jul-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 472/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In O.S. No. 472/2022, the Court of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC at Arasikere granted a temporary injunction on 15 October 2025. The 16-year-old plaintiff (represented by her grandmother) sought to restrain five defendants from alienating, mortgaging, or encumbering ancestral joint family property. The court found a prima facie case that the property belonged to the joint family and that defendants were attempting to sell it in collusion to defeat the plaintiff's legitimate share. The balance of convenience favored maintaining status quo to prevent irreparable loss and multiplicity of proceedings. The defendants were permanently restrained from selling, gifting, leasing, or creating any charge on the suit property (Sy. No. 45/2 at Doddagatta Village) until final disposal of the suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case