Tippamma W/o Bhimashappa Kotaraki Age63years Occ Household R/o Udagi, now R/o Shahabad Tq Chittapur vs Anand Kumar S/o Vasant Kumar Age 12years Minor U/g Mother, R/o Udagi Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi. — 20/2019
Case under U/o 41 Rule 1 of Cpc Section R/w Sec.96. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.
R.A. - Regular Appeals
CNR: KAKB710001292019
Filing Number
19/2019
Filing Date
07-09-2019
Registration No
20/2019
Registration Date
07-09-2019
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM
Judge
650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Tippamma W/o Bhimashappa Kotaraki Age63years Occ Household R/o Udagi, now R/o Shahabad Tq Chittapur
Adv. SRI. RAVINDRA INJALIKAR ADVOCATE
Shivanand S/o Bhimashappa Kotaraki Age 48yrs Occ Pvt.Servant R/o Shahabad Tq Chittapur Dist Klb.
Ramakanth S/o Bhimshappa Kotaraki Age 38 yrs Occ Pvt.Sevant R/o Shahabad Tq Chittaputr.
Ratnamma W/o Sharanappa Kudri, Age 33 yrs Occ Govt.Teacher R/o Sedam.
Respondent(s)
Anand Kumar S/o Vasant Kumar Age 12years Minor U/g Mother, R/o Udagi Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi.
Indubai W/o Vasanthkumar Kotataki, Age35 yrs, Occ Household R/o Satapatanahalli Tq Sedam,Dist Klb.
Srimanthrao s/o Bhimshappa Kotarki, 40 yrs, R/o Indiranagar Maddi No. 2, Near Gouli house, Shahabad,
Hearing History
Judge: 650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Disposed
JUDGMENTS
JUDGMENTS
JUDGMENTS
JUDGMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 17-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS |
| 16-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS |
| 13-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: R.A. No. 20/2019 Court Decision: The appellate court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's judgment (dated 04.12.2018), and remanded the matter for fresh disposal. Key Reasoning: The appellate court found that the trial court erred by decreeing the partition suit without sufficient evidence proving all properties were ancestral/joint family property. The court determined only 2 of 8 suit items were ancestral properties, and the trial court failed to address the validity of contested gift deeds (dated 01.06.2016 and 26.10.2016) or give defendants opportunity to present their defense. The matter was remanded requiring defendants to file written statements and both parties to present evidence anew. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: R.A. No. 20/2019 Court Decision: The appellate court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's judgment (dated 04.12.2018), and remanded the matter for fresh disposal. Key Reasoning: The appellate court found that the trial court erred by decreeing the partition suit without sufficient evidence proving all properties were ancestral/joint family property. The court determined only 2 of 8 suit items were ancestral properties, and the trial court failed to address the validity of contested gift deeds (dated 01.06.2016 and 26.10.2016) or give defendants opportunity to present their defense. The matter was remanded requiring defendants to file written statements and both parties to present evidence anew. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts