PAPAIAH GOUD KONAPUR S/O NARASAIAH GOUD KONAPUR vs MOHAMMED ALI S/O MD SHOUKAT ALI AGE 25 YEARS. OCC BUSINESS R/O TELANGANA. — 26/2023
Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 26. Status: EVIDENCE-CIVIL. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB710000732023
Next Hearing
09th April 2026
e-Filing Number
27-03-2023
Filing Number
26/2023
Filing Date
27-03-2023
Registration No
26/2023
Registration Date
27-03-2023
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM
Judge
650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PAPAIAH GOUD KONAPUR S/O NARASAIAH GOUD KONAPUR
Adv. RUDRAWAR NARAYANREDDY
Respondent(s)
MOHAMMED ALI S/O MD SHOUKAT ALI AGE 25 YEARS. OCC BUSINESS R/O TELANGANA.
Ameena Begum W/o Shoukat Ali Age 48 years, Occ Household R/o Telangana.
Kum, Tasmia Mariam D/o Md Shoukat Ali Age 23 years, Occ Household R/o Telangana.
Md. Muzammil S/o Md Shoukat Ali Age 22 years, Occ Household R/o Telangana.
Abdul Rasheed S/o Abdul Raheman Age Major Occ Agril, R/o Sedam.
Hearing History
Judge: 650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
EVIDENCE-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 17-02-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 22-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 09-01-2026 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
| 28-11-2025 | EVIDENCE-CIVIL |
Interim Orders
In OS No. 26/2023, the court examined testimony from PW-1 on 24-07-2025 regarding a property dispute involving the 5th defendant's ownership claim to land. The court rejected the 5th defendant's counsel's contentions regarding the GPA and property ownership, finding the arguments incorrect. The 5th defendant's counsel was permitted to adopt the party's statement from defendants 1-4, and the case proceeded with no further hearings scheduled at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
In OS No. 26/2023, the court examined testimony from PW-1 on 24-07-2025 regarding a property dispute involving the 5th defendant's ownership claim to land. The court rejected the 5th defendant's counsel's contentions regarding the GPA and property ownership, finding the arguments incorrect. The 5th defendant's counsel was permitted to adopt the party's statement from defendants 1-4, and the case proceeded with no further hearings scheduled at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts