Manjula W/o Naganna Sutar (D/o Vithal Rao) Age 34 Yrs Occ Agri and Household R/o Janiwar Tq Jewargi vs Shantamma W/o Shivappa Bachimathi Age 52 Yrs Occ Agri and Household R/o Janiwar Tq Jewargi. — 48/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: ARGUMENTS-CIVIL. Next hearing: 18th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB620011192021
Next Hearing
18th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
44/2021
Filing Date
24-06-2021
Registration No
48/2021
Registration Date
26-06-2021
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, JEVARGI
Judge
328-CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Jewargi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Manjula W/o Naganna Sutar (D/o Vithal Rao) Age 34 Yrs Occ Agri and Household R/o Janiwar Tq Jewargi
Adv. J.V.HATTI
Respondent(s)
Shantamma W/o Shivappa Bachimathi Age 52 Yrs Occ Agri and Household R/o Janiwar Tq Jewargi.
Hearing History
Judge: 328-CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Jewargi
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 07-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 24-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL | |
| 19-12-2025 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL | |
| 28-11-2025 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
Interim Orders
Summary: In OS No. 48/2021, the court examined witness testimony on 07.03.2026 regarding a property dispute. The plaintiff claimed she received Rs. 3,62,000 from a property sale on 25.07.2017 but alleged the defendant fraudulently withheld the property and made false claims. The court found the plaintiff's testimony to contain false statements and sworn affidavits, noting that no civil case had been filed despite the plaintiff's alleged loss of possession. The petition was dismissed as the court ruled the plaintiff has no valid rights or claims over the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: In OS No. 48/2021, the court examined witness testimony on 07.03.2026 regarding a property dispute. The plaintiff claimed she received Rs. 3,62,000 from a property sale on 25.07.2017 but alleged the defendant fraudulently withheld the property and made false claims. The court found the plaintiff's testimony to contain false statements and sworn affidavits, noting that no civil case had been filed despite the plaintiff's alleged loss of possession. The petition was dismissed as the court ruled the plaintiff has no valid rights or claims over the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts