Ahamed Modinsab Chopadar Age 64 yrs R/o Khadarbag Oni Savanur vs Sayyedmeera Abdulkhadar Narayanapur Age 80 yrs R/o Chandani Nagar Tq Savanur Dist Haveri — 410/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,1,3. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAHV600023692025
Next Hearing
06th June 2026
Filing Number
410/2025
Filing Date
09-10-2025
Registration No
410/2025
Registration Date
09-10-2025
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAVANUR
Judge
361-CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ahamed Modinsab Chopadar Age 64 yrs R/o Khadarbag Oni Savanur
Adv. P.R.KALAL.
Respondent(s)
Sayyedmeera Abdulkhadar Narayanapur Age 80 yrs R/o Chandani Nagar Tq Savanur Dist Haveri
Hearing History
Judge: 361-CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
SUMMONS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 18-12-2025 | HEARING |
| 12-12-2025 | HEARING |
| 04-12-2025 | HEARING |
| 09-10-2025 | SUMMONS |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The Civil Judge rejected the compromise petition filed jointly by the plaintiff and defendant dated 04-12-2025. The court held that while oral gifts (Hiba) are valid under Muslim personal law, the compromise sought judicial recognition of agricultural land fragmentation that violates the Karnataka Land Revenue Act's 2021 Notification prohibiting creation of survey numbers for agricultural land below 5 guntas. The court found the compromise unlawful under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC as it would indirectly facilitate unauthorized layouts and defeat statutory protections against unregulated development. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The Civil Judge rejected the compromise petition filed jointly by the plaintiff and defendant dated 04-12-2025. The court held that while oral gifts (Hiba) are valid under Muslim personal law, the compromise sought judicial recognition of agricultural land fragmentation that violates the Karnataka Land Revenue Act's 2021 Notification prohibiting creation of survey numbers for agricultural land below 5 guntas. The court found the compromise unlawful under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC as it would indirectly facilitate unauthorized layouts and defeat statutory protections against unregulated development. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts