Santosh S/o Late Basavaraj Talawar Age 24 yrs Occ Agril. vs Ayyamma W/o Late Devappa Talawar Age75yrs Occ Agril, R/o Sangavi. — 64/2021
Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 26. Status: ARGUMENTS-CIVIL. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAKB710001592021
Next Hearing
11th June 2026
Filing Number
64/2021
Filing Date
29-09-2021
Registration No
64/2021
Registration Date
29-09-2021
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM
Judge
650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Santosh S/o Late Basavaraj Talawar Age 24 yrs Occ Agril.
Adv. Jagadish S Benakanahalli.
Ambrish S/o Late Basavarak Talawar Age21yrs Occ Agril.
Respondent(s)
Ayyamma W/o Late Devappa Talawar Age75yrs Occ Agril, R/o Sangavi.
Chandappa S/o Late Devappa Talawar Age52yrs Occ Agril.
Sangappa S/o Late Devappa Talawar Age47yrs Occ Agril.(Legal Heir)
Hearing History
Judge: 650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
ARGUMENTS-CIVIL
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-06-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 16-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 10-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 06-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
| 04-04-2026 | ARGUMENTS-CIVIL |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: OS No. 64/2021 On 16-03-2026, the court examined PW-1 (first petitioner) through cross-examination by the respondents' counsel (HSR). The petitioner testified regarding property matters involving his grandmother and uncle, claiming documents were presented only for certain properties while others were excluded from the suit. The court recorded his statements denying various allegations and noted no further cross-examination was required. The petitioner's statement was recorded in open court and he was directed to affix his fingerprint. The case proceedings on this date concluded with the court approving the examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: OS No. 64/2021 On 16-03-2026, the court examined PW-1 (first petitioner) through cross-examination by the respondents' counsel (HSR). The petitioner testified regarding property matters involving his grandmother and uncle, claiming documents were presented only for certain properties while others were excluded from the suit. The court recorded his statements denying various allegations and noted no further cross-examination was required. The petitioner's statement was recorded in open court and he was directed to affix his fingerprint. The case proceedings on this date concluded with the court approving the examination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts