NANJANAYAKA vs PUTTACHIKKANAYAKA — 210/2018
Case under U/s 26 and Order Vii Rule 1 of Cpc Section O. Status: ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS210007422018
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
212/2018
Filing Date
25-06-2018
Registration No
210/2018
Registration Date
25-06-2018
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H.D.KOTE
Judge
1320-II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFCH D KOTE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NANJANAYAKA
Adv. G.N.NARAYANA GOWDA
Respondent(s)
PUTTACHIKKANAYAKA
PUTTASIDDAMMA
CHIKKANAYAKA
RAJANAYAKA
Hearing History
Judge: 1320-II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFCH D KOTE
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 26-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 07-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 03-03-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 20-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS | |
| 12-02-2026 | ARGUMENTS |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case No.: O.S. No. 210/18 Date: 22.08.2025 This is a property dispute case involving land and a well (borewell). The court found that the disputed property comprising survey nos. 111/2 and 111/3 (totaling approximately 3 acres 35 guntas) is jointly owned by both the plaintiff and defendant, with the plaintiff entitled to 1 acre 37½ guntas. The court determined that a well constructed on the property was done with mutual agreement and water sharing was also agreed upon between both parties. The case has been disposed of with the court's findings on property rights and shared ownership, with the matter referred for further proceedings before the Additional Civil Judge and other concerned authorities regarding implementation of the court's conclusions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case No.: O.S. No. 210/18 Date: 22.08.2025 This is a property dispute case involving land and a well (borewell). The court found that the disputed property comprising survey nos. 111/2 and 111/3 (totaling approximately 3 acres 35 guntas) is jointly owned by both the plaintiff and defendant, with the plaintiff entitled to 1 acre 37½ guntas. The court determined that a well constructed on the property was done with mutual agreement and water sharing was also agreed upon between both parties. The case has been disposed of with the court's findings on property rights and shared ownership, with the matter referred for further proceedings before the Additional Civil Judge and other concerned authorities regarding implementation of the court's conclusions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts