RAVI vs BASAMMANI — 86/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section OR.7 R.1-2. Disposed: Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH on 14th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS200002822025
Filing Number
90/2025
Filing Date
11-06-2025
Registration No
86/2025
Registration Date
11-06-2025
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, H D KOTE
Judge
1224-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H D KOTE
Decision Date
14th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--SETTLED IN LOK ADALATH
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAVI
Adv. SHANTHA
MANGALAMMA
Respondent(s)
BASAMMANI
NAGARAJU H.B.
SOMASHEKHARA
RAVI
SURESHA
RAJESHWARI
MANJULA
SUSHEELA
KUMARI
SAKAMMA
BASAVANNA
NEELAMMA
GEETHA
Hearing History
Judge: 1224-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H D KOTE
Disposed
Refer to LA/Mediation
Call On
Call On
Refer to LA/Mediation
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Refer to LA/Mediation |
| 28-01-2026 | Call On |
| 13-12-2025 | Call On |
| 14-11-2025 | Refer to LA/Mediation |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: O.S. No. 86/2025 Court: Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, H.D. Kote Parties: Ravi and Mangalamma (Plaintiffs) v. Basammani, Nagaraju H.B., Somashekhara, and others (Defendants) Decision: The court approved a compromise settlement between all parties on 14 March 2026 through Lok Adalath. Properties specified in schedules were distributed among plaintiffs and defendants as agreed, with Ravi receiving specific land parcels, Mangalamma receiving ₹1,00,000 in cash, and each defendant receiving their designated property shares. The suit was decreed in terms of the compromise petition, and court fees were refunded to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: O.S. No. 86/2025 Court: Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, H.D. Kote Parties: Ravi and Mangalamma (Plaintiffs) v. Basammani, Nagaraju H.B., Somashekhara, and others (Defendants) Decision: The court approved a compromise settlement between all parties on 14 March 2026 through Lok Adalath. Properties specified in schedules were distributed among plaintiffs and defendants as agreed, with Ravi receiving specific land parcels, Mangalamma receiving ₹1,00,000 in cash, and each defendant receiving their designated property shares. The suit was decreed in terms of the compromise petition, and court fees were refunded to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts