Jaleel vs Maheboob Sab Advocate - mv ladda — 55/2015
Case under Order 7 Rule 11 Cpc Section ,. Status: OBJECTION. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB520005612015
Next Hearing
17th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
55/2015
Filing Date
03-06-2015
Registration No
55/2015
Registration Date
03-06-2015
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITAPUR
Judge
326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Jaleel
Adv. Gangadhar Salimath
Respondent(s)
Maheboob Sab Advocate - mv ladda
Aziz Sab s/o late mashak sab tavangera age 70 r/o chincholi h
Zahangir Patel s/o late ladle patel tavangera age 29 r/o chincholi h
Mohd Gouse
Abedabegum
Maheboob
Arif
Smt Mumtaz Begum W/o Saleem D/o Ladle Patel Age 49 Yrs Occ Household Chandrayangutta Bandlaguda Hyde
Hearing History
Judge: 326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
OBJECTION
OBJECTION
OBJECTION
SUMMONS
ORDERS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 17-03-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 07-03-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 23-02-2026 | SUMMONS | |
| 07-02-2026 | ORDERS |
Interim Orders
Summary: In this property dispute case (OOS 55/2015), the court examined claims regarding land inheritance and succession rights. The court found that the petitioner's father held certain property rights to 2 acres 30 guntas of land, which was registered on 02-05-1977, and later inherited by the petitioner. The court determined that the petitioner is entitled to relief concerning the property dispute and ordered that the petitioner's rights be recognized, while directing a simplified resolution of the matter without unnecessary procedural complications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In this property dispute case (OOS 55/2015), the court examined claims regarding land inheritance and succession rights. The court found that the petitioner's father held certain property rights to 2 acres 30 guntas of land, which was registered on 02-05-1977, and later inherited by the petitioner. The court determined that the petitioner is entitled to relief concerning the property dispute and ordered that the petitioner's rights be recognized, while directing a simplified resolution of the matter without unnecessary procedural complications. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts