KENDAGANNAPPA vs NATARAJA — 44/2020
Case under U/s 26 and Order Vii Rule 1 of Cpc Section .. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS200010832020
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
46/2020
Filing Date
04-08-2020
Registration No
44/2020
Registration Date
06-08-2020
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, H D KOTE
Judge
1224-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H D KOTE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KENDAGANNAPPA
Adv. B.S.Umesha
Respondent(s)
NATARAJA
CHIKKARATHNA
NAVEENA
H.S.MALLESHA
Hearing History
Judge: 1224-PRL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H D KOTE
EVIDENCE
OBJECTION
OBJECTION
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 25-03-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 17-03-2026 | OBJECTION | |
| 07-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 05-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a civil court order (O.S. No. 44/2020) from a Kannada-language proceeding. The court examined witness testimony on 27.9.2024 regarding a property ownership dispute. The witness, a 50-year-old resident, provided deposition about property documents and ownership claims, but the court found significant inconsistencies in the testimony regarding document authenticity and dates (particularly a stamp paper dated 1998 claimed to relate to 1975 events). The case hearing was adjourned as the plaintiff's counsel requested time, with no determination on the merits rendered at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a civil court order (O.S. No. 44/2020) from a Kannada-language proceeding. The court examined witness testimony on 27.9.2024 regarding a property ownership dispute. The witness, a 50-year-old resident, provided deposition about property documents and ownership claims, but the court found significant inconsistencies in the testimony regarding document authenticity and dates (particularly a stamp paper dated 1998 claimed to relate to 1975 events). The case hearing was adjourned as the plaintiff's counsel requested time, with no determination on the merits rendered at this stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts