Mallamma W/o Bheemsha, age. 42 years, Occ. agriculture and household. vs Subhadramma W/o Chandrappa, age. 65years, occ. agriculture and household. — 94/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section VII,1,2. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 07th April 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAKB410002932023

EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

07th April 2026

Filing Number

95/2023

Filing Date

25-07-2023

Registration No

94/2023

Registration Date

25-07-2023

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI

Judge

828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section VII,1,2

Petitioner(s)

Mallamma W/o Bheemsha, age. 42 years, Occ. agriculture and household.

Adv. SHIVARAYA.H. HADIMANI

Saraswathi W/o Bheemsha, age.37 years, Occ.agriculture and household.

Respondent(s)

Subhadramma W/o Chandrappa, age. 65years, occ. agriculture and household.

Gangamma W/o Gundappa, age. 32 years, Occ. agriculture and household.

Nagamma W/o Dayanand, age.29 years, Occ. agriculture and household.

Jagappa S/o Chandrappa, age.27 years, Occ. agriculture.

Gundappa S/o Chandrappa, age.24 years, Occ. agriculture.

Hearing History

Judge: 828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE

05-02-2026

EVIDENCE

13-01-2026

EVIDENCE

03-01-2026

EVIDENCE

19-12-2025

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

27-07-2023
Orders
18-12-2023
Orders
30-05-2024
Issue
20-01-2025
Deposition
12-12-2025
Deposition
06-03-2026
Deposition

The court heard arguments from both the plaintiff (V.S.D) and defendant's counsel on 06-03-2026 in case O.S. No. 94/2023. The plaintiff's counsel submitted evidence and arguments, which were found to be in order, while the defendant's counsel was given time to cross-examine the witnesses. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court heard arguments from both the plaintiff (V.S.D) and defendant's counsel on 06-03-2026 in case O.S. No. 94/2023. The plaintiff's counsel submitted evidence and arguments, which were found to be in order, while the defendant's counsel was given time to cross-examine the witnesses. The case was adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case