Hasina Asif Shekh Age 37 yrs R/o Lalashakatti Oni Savanur Dist Haveri vs Sayyadmeera Abdulkhadar Narayanapur Age 80 yrs R/o Chandani Nagar Tq Savanur Dist Haveri — 414/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7.1.3. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 06th June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAHV600023732025

HEARING

Next Hearing

06th June 2026

Filing Number

414/2025

Filing Date

09-10-2025

Registration No

414/2025

Registration Date

09-10-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAVANUR

Judge

361-CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7.1.3

Petitioner(s)

Hasina Asif Shekh Age 37 yrs R/o Lalashakatti Oni Savanur Dist Haveri

Adv. P.R.KALAL.

Respondent(s)

Sayyadmeera Abdulkhadar Narayanapur Age 80 yrs R/o Chandani Nagar Tq Savanur Dist Haveri

Hearing History

Judge: 361-CIVIL JUDGE and JMFC

06-03-2026

HEARING

18-12-2025

HEARING

12-12-2025

HEARING

04-12-2025

HEARING

09-10-2025

SUMMONS

Interim Orders

12-12-2025
Orders

Summary: The compromise petition filed jointly by the plaintiff and defendant was rejected. The court found that while an oral Hiba (gift) is valid under Muslim personal law, it cannot override statutory restrictions under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The court refused to recognize the compromise because it would facilitate unauthorized fragmentation of agricultural land into parcels below the 5-gunta minimum prescribed by the 2021 notification, thereby violating public interest and urban planning regulations. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The compromise petition filed jointly by the plaintiff and defendant was rejected. The court found that while an oral Hiba (gift) is valid under Muslim personal law, it cannot override statutory restrictions under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. The court refused to recognize the compromise because it would facilitate unauthorized fragmentation of agricultural land into parcels below the 5-gunta minimum prescribed by the 2021 notification, thereby violating public interest and urban planning regulations. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SAVANUR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case