Sridhar Reddy S/o Madhusudhanreddy Mali Patil vs Srikanthreddy S/o madhusudhanreddy Mali Patil — 51/2025

Case under 7 Rule 1 and 2 Cpc Section 7. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAKB720026232025

HEARING

Next Hearing

10th June 2026

e-Filing Number

28-07-2025

Filing Number

51/2025

Filing Date

29-07-2025

Registration No

51/2025

Registration Date

29-07-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM

Judge

329-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. JMFC,Sedam

Acts & Sections

7 Rule 1 and 2 Cpc Section 7

Petitioner(s)

Sridhar Reddy S/o Madhusudhanreddy Mali Patil

Adv. Gopal Rathod

Respondent(s)

Srikanthreddy S/o madhusudhanreddy Mali Patil

Soubhagyalaxmi W/o Madhusudhanreddy Mali Patil

Hearing History

Judge: 329-CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. JMFC,Sedam

24-03-2026

HEARING

13-03-2026

HEARING

10-02-2026

HEARING

09-02-2026

HEARING

27-01-2026

HEARING

Interim Orders

14-10-2025
Orders

Case Summary: O.S. No. 51/2025 Outcome: Temporary injunction granted in favor of plaintiff. The court allowed the plaintiff's application for ad-interim temporary injunction, restraining the defendants and anyone claiming through them from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession of land Sy. No.376/2 (measuring 01 acre 02 guntas) in Mudhol village until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case based on a 2015 compromise decree and valid revenue records showing him as the registered owner, and determined that balance of convenience and risk of irreparable loss favored granting the injunction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: O.S. No. 51/2025 Outcome: Temporary injunction granted in favor of plaintiff. The court allowed the plaintiff's application for ad-interim temporary injunction, restraining the defendants and anyone claiming through them from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession of land Sy. No.376/2 (measuring 01 acre 02 guntas) in Mudhol village until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case based on a 2015 compromise decree and valid revenue records showing him as the registered owner, and determined that balance of convenience and risk of irreparable loss favored granting the injunction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SEDAM All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case