GURUBASAVAIAH vs BASAVAIAH @ RAJAIAH — 424/2013

Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section 0. Disposed: Contested--DECREED on 24th March 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAMS210023072013

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

424/2013

Filing Date

16-12-2013

Registration No

424/2013

Registration Date

16-12-2013

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H.D.KOTE

Judge

1095-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC H D KOTE

Decision Date

24th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DECREED

Acts & Sections

order 7 rule 1 of CPC Section 0

Petitioner(s)

GURUBASAVAIAH

Adv. P. NAGENDRA

Respondent(s)

BASAVAIAH @ RAJAIAH

-

-

-

-

-

Hearing History

Judge: 1095-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC H D KOTE

24-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

JUDGEMENTS

18-03-2026

FOR CLARIFICATION

13-03-2026

JUDGEMENTS

11-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

24-03-2026
Orders

Summary The court decreed the plaintiff's partition suit in part, holding that the plaintiff and defendant are joint Hindu family members with equal shares in ancestral joint family property (3 acres in Survey No. 29). The court awarded the plaintiff's legal heirs 20 guntas (0.5 acres) of land as their legitimate share, finding the defendant failed to prove his claim of absolute ownership through Land Tribunal occupancy rights. The case was partly allowed with parties bearing their own costs, and parties were given time to mutually agree on partition by metes and bounds before final decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

13-07-2016
Issue
02-01-2018
Deposition
08-06-2022
Deposition
casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court decreed the plaintiff's partition suit in part, holding that the plaintiff and defendant are joint Hindu family members with equal shares in ancestral joint family property (3 acres in Survey No. 29). The court awarded the plaintiff's legal heirs 20 guntas (0.5 acres) of land as their legitimate share, finding the defendant failed to prove his claim of absolute ownership through Land Tribunal occupancy rights. The case was partly allowed with parties bearing their own costs, and parties were given time to mutually agree on partition by metes and bounds before final decree. 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, H.D.KOTE All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case