KRISHNA vs SANNAKUMAR Advocate - S.GANGARAJU — 389/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26 O 7 R 1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 31st July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 31-Jul-2026

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAMS210029352024

Filing Number

390/2024

Filing Date

19-Dec-2024

Registration No

389/2024

Registration Date

19-Dec-2024

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, H.D.KOTE

Judge

1320-II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 26 O 7 R 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KRISHNA

    Adv. VENKATESHA .H.G.

  2. 2.GOPAMMA

  3. 3.UMESH

  4. 4.KUMARA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANNAKUMAR Advocate - S.GANGARAJU

  2. 2.BUDDI

  3. 3.MANIYAMMA

  4. 4.SOMESHA

  5. 5.RAVI

  6. 6.KUMARA

  7. 7.RAJASHEKHARA

Case History

  1. 31-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  4. 23-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  5. 12-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  6. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  7. 17-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  8. 10-Jun-2025

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  9. 01-Apr-2025

    OrdersView PDF

    CASE SUMMARY: O.S. No. 389/2024 The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction against the defendants regarding property bearing Sy.No.78 (4 acres). The judge found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, citing discrepancies between plaint schedule boundaries and a 1969 sale deed, and lack of clear documentation showing correct property boundaries. The court also noted that a Thasildar's order dated 19.11.2024 recognized the defendants' right to access their property via a road through the suit property, which undermined plaintiffs' interference claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  10. 01-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  11. 24-Mar-2025

    Orders

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  12. 14-Mar-2025

    Orders

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  13. 03-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  14. 28-Feb-2025

    Written Stmt

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  15. 20-Feb-2025

    Written Stmt

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  16. 16-Jan-2025

    Summons

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  17. 20-Dec-2024

    Summons

    II Addl. CIVIL Judge And Jmfch D Kote

  18. 19-Dec-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  19. 19-Dec-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 389/2024

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: O.S. No. 389/2024 The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction against the defendants regarding property bearing Sy.No.78 (4 acres). The judge found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, citing discrepancies between plaint schedule boundaries and a 1969 sale deed, and lack of clear documentation showing correct property boundaries. The court also noted that a Thasildar's order dated 19.11.2024 recognized the defendants' right to access their property via a road through the suit property, which undermined plaintiffs' interference claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case