Shamamma Wo Late Ashappa alias Ashanna Besta Age 76 yrs occ Agri Ro Chandrakal Tq Kondangal Dist vs Narasamma Wo Late Dodla Narasappa Bakki Age 54 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi — 19/2015
Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 7Rule1and2CPC. Disposed: Contested--DECREED on 25th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB710001462015
Filing Number
18/2015
Filing Date
22-07-2015
Registration No
19/2015
Registration Date
31-07-2015
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM
Judge
650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Decision Date
25th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shamamma Wo Late Ashappa alias Ashanna Besta Age 76 yrs occ Agri Ro Chandrakal Tq Kondangal Dist
Adv. S K D ADV
Respondent(s)
Narasamma Wo Late Dodla Narasappa Bakki Age 54 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Saraswati Wo Late Ramappa Bakki AGe 58 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Buggamma Wo Late Bhimappa Age 64 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Ashanna So Pedda Yallappa Bakki Age 70 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Janakamma Wo Late Mogalappa Bakki Age 60 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Chandramma Wo Late Basappa Bakki Age 62 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Buggamma Wo Late Narasappa Bakki Age 65 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Anjalamma Wo Late Chandrappa Waddar Age 65 yrs occ Agri Ro Silarkot Tq Sedam Dist Kalaburagi
Hearing History
Judge: 650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 13-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 03-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 02-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: O.S. No. 19/2015 Court Decision (25 March 2026): The court partially decreed the plaintiff's suit. The plaintiff's legal representatives were declared owners of only 2 of the 6 disputed properties (suit items No. 2 and 4), while losing rights over the other four properties (suit items No. 1, 3, 5, and 6) due to a binding 1986 compromise agreement. The court directed revenue authorities to update records for the two properties in the plaintiff's heirs' names and issued a permanent injunction against defendants interfering with those two properties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: O.S. No. 19/2015 Court Decision (25 March 2026): The court partially decreed the plaintiff's suit. The plaintiff's legal representatives were declared owners of only 2 of the 6 disputed properties (suit items No. 2 and 4), while losing rights over the other four properties (suit items No. 1, 3, 5, and 6) due to a binding 1986 compromise agreement. The court directed revenue authorities to update records for the two properties in the plaintiff's heirs' names and issued a permanent injunction against defendants interfering with those two properties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts