K.V.Sheshadri vs John Kristopher Advocate - M.B.Charmanna — 407/2012
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 of Cpc Section Order7Rule1ofCPC. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 15th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS310000112012
Next Hearing
15th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Date
12-12-2012
Registration No
407/2012
Registration Date
12-12-2012
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HUNSUR
Judge
447-PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUNSUR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
K.V.Sheshadri
Adv. S.Ramesh
Respondent(s)
John Kristopher Advocate - M.B.Charmanna
Subbaiah(Legal Heir)
Adv. M.B.Charmanna
Hearing History
Judge: 447-PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUNSUR
HEARING
ORDERS
ORDERS
ORDERS
HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | HEARING | |
| 26-02-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 23-02-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 21-01-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 12-12-2025 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Case Summary O.S. No. 407/2012 | Date: 06.07.2024 The court examined witness testimony in this property dispute case. The plaintiff claims ownership of land (Survey No. 42-43) through a 2012 purchase, while the defendant contests this claim. The witness testified that approximately 4 acres 12 guntas of land was mortgaged, and a survey was submitted to the court. The court found that the plaintiff made contradictory statements and presented false evidence regarding possession and ownership of the disputed property. The judge determined the plaintiff filed false documents and gave false testimony to support an illegitimate claim to the land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary O.S. No. 407/2012 | Date: 06.07.2024 The court examined witness testimony in this property dispute case. The plaintiff claims ownership of land (Survey No. 42-43) through a 2012 purchase, while the defendant contests this claim. The witness testified that approximately 4 acres 12 guntas of land was mortgaged, and a survey was submitted to the court. The court found that the plaintiff made contradictory statements and presented false evidence regarding possession and ownership of the disputed property. The judge determined the plaintiff filed false documents and gave false testimony to support an illegitimate claim to the land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts