SANNAMMA vs MYSORE DISTRICT SCHOOL — 248/2006

Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section --. Status: ORDERS. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAMS080007842009

ORDERS

Next Hearing

02nd June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Date

24-02-2006

Registration No

248/2006

Registration Date

24-02-2006

Court

JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU

Judge

434-JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES

Acts & Sections

Order 7 Rule 1 of CPC Section --

Petitioner(s)

SANNAMMA

Adv. BY RRN

Respondent(s)

MYSORE DISTRICT SCHOOL

T.R.SHESHADRI

BHAGEERATHAMMA

R.ESHWARA

G.SUNDARI,

M.D.SHIVANANJAPPA

SHIVALINGAIAH,

SANNAMMA,

V.LAKSHMI,

SOMASHEKAR

Hearing History

Judge: 434-JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES

07-03-2026

ORDERS

17-01-2026

ORDERS

16-01-2026

SUMMONS

15-11-2025

SUMMONS

29-08-2025

SUMMONS

Interim Orders

15-10-2015
Deposition
24-09-2016
Orders
24-09-2016
Orders
06-10-2016
Deposition
06-10-2016
Deposition
27-10-2016
Deposition
18-11-2016
Deposition
25-11-2016
Deposition
08-12-2016
Deposition
08-12-2016
Deposition
11-01-2017
Deposition
11-01-2017
Deposition
23-02-2017
Deposition
03-08-2017
Deposition
14-12-2017
Deposition
18-01-2018
Deposition
07-11-2018
Orders
07-12-2018
Deposition
20-02-2019
Deposition
01-03-2019
Deposition
15-03-2019
Deposition
11-02-2020
Orders
05-07-2018
Issue
23-07-2016
Issue
07-03-2024
Orders

Summary The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Mysuru rejected three interim applications (IAs 45-47) filed by the plaintiff seeking to reopen the case and recall a witness to present satellite imagery evidence from the government's Dishank website. The court found that the plaintiff had not made sufficient cause for reopening, as evidence had already been concluded and a similar request for court commissioner appointment was previously dismissed by the High Court. The applications were rejected with no order as to costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal at Mysuru rejected three interim applications (IAs 45-47) filed by the plaintiff seeking to reopen the case and recall a witness to present satellite imagery evidence from the government's Dishank website. The court found that the plaintiff had not made sufficient cause for reopening, as evidence had already been concluded and a similar request for court commissioner appointment was previously dismissed by the High Court. The applications were rejected with no order as to costs. 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

JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case