Nagamma w/o Bhimaraya Vaderaj, 41 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam, now c/o Lokesh, H. No. 16/17, vs Sabanna s/o Bhimraya Borra Waddar, 45 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam. — 19/2024

Case under U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 7. Status: EVIDENCE-CIVIL. Next hearing: 17th March 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAKB710012942024

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Next Hearing

17th March 2026

Filing Number

19/2024

Filing Date

08-02-2024

Registration No

19/2024

Registration Date

08-02-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM

Judge

650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.

Acts & Sections

U/o 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 7

Petitioner(s)

Nagamma w/o Bhimaraya Vaderaj, 41 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam, now c/o Lokesh, H. No. 16/17,

Adv. SRI. RAVINDRA INJALIKAR ADVOCATE

Respondent(s)

Sabanna s/o Bhimraya Borra Waddar, 45 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam.

Yellappa s/o Sabanna Myakal, 70 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam.

Chandramma w/o Yellappa, 60 yrs, R/o Namwar, Tq. Sedam.

Hearing History

Judge: 650-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC , SEDAM.

06-03-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

16-02-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

02-02-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

06-01-2026

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

12-12-2025

EVIDENCE-CIVIL

Interim Orders

09-02-2024
Orders
27-09-2024
Deposition
28-11-2024
Deposition
18-02-2025
Issue
01-08-2025
Deposition

Summary: In OS No. 19/2024, the court examined testimony from PW-1 (first witness) regarding a land dispute case. The witness testified about land ownership claims and a monetary settlement of 2 lakh rupees. The court found the witness's testimony inconsistent and unreliable on key issues, including claims of no relationship to the disputed land and denial of the defendants' ownership rights established since 1975. Cross-examination is continuing, with the case scheduled for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In OS No. 19/2024, the court examined testimony from PW-1 (first witness) regarding a land dispute case. The witness testified about land ownership claims and a monetary settlement of 2 lakh rupees. The court found the witness's testimony inconsistent and unreliable on key issues, including claims of no relationship to the disputed land and denial of the defendants' ownership rights established since 1975. Cross-examination is continuing, with the case scheduled for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case