Sharanappa vs The State of Karnataka represented by Governor through Tahsildar Chittapur — 9/2017
Case under Order 7 Rule 10 Cpc Section U,O,7,rule,1,Rw,26,CPC. Status: OBJECTION. Next hearing: 15th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB520001902017
Next Hearing
15th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
9/2017
Filing Date
17-02-2017
Registration No
9/2017
Registration Date
17-02-2017
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITAPUR
Judge
326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sharanappa
Adv. Vijayakumar Miskin
Respondent(s)
The State of Karnataka represented by Governor through Tahsildar Chittapur
The State through Deputy Commissioner Mini Vidhana Soudha Kalaburagi
Hearing History
Judge: 326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
OBJECTION
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 07-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 18-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 12-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 05-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
Interim Orders
Case Summary OS No. 9/2017 | Chittarpur Civil Court The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for declaration of ownership of the disputed property. The court found that the plaintiff purchased the property through a registered deed dated 07.05.1976 from the previous owner (Basappa), and established ownership and possession. However, the court rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding encroachments and structural modifications, noting inconsistencies in the plaintiff's evidence regarding buildings constructed on the property, particularly regarding a children's hostel. The court concluded the plaintiff established sufficient ownership and possession rights over the property, with no further relief granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary OS No. 9/2017 | Chittarpur Civil Court The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for declaration of ownership of the disputed property. The court found that the plaintiff purchased the property through a registered deed dated 07.05.1976 from the previous owner (Basappa), and established ownership and possession. However, the court rejected the plaintiff's claims regarding encroachments and structural modifications, noting inconsistencies in the plaintiff's evidence regarding buildings constructed on the property, particularly regarding a children's hostel. The court concluded the plaintiff established sufficient ownership and possession rights over the property, with no further relief granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts