NASIR PASHA vs NOORJEB — 76/2022
Case under U/o 7 Rule of 1 C.p.c. Section U/O VII RULE, I, CPC. Status: COMPROMISE. Next hearing: 29th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS410002902022
Next Hearing
29th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
77/2022
Filing Date
09-02-2022
Registration No
76/2022
Registration Date
10-02-2022
Court
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KRISHNARAJANAGARA
Judge
1097-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KRISHNARAJANAGAR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
NASIR PASHA
Adv. M.C. SHASHIKANTH
Respondent(s)
NOORJEB
NOOR ABJAKHANAM
MAHAMMUD NAVAJ KHAN
RASHEED NAVAJ KHAN
SHAYEED NAVAJKHAN
MAJEED NAVAJKHAN
HAMJED IKBAL KHAN(Legal Heir)
JAVEED KHAN
JAHED KHAN
ABEED IKBAL KHAN
NOUSHAD APREJ KHARAM
NOORASAYEED BEGAM
VALEEPASHA
HASEEN BEGAM
ANEESA BANU
BUSRA BANU
ROOMAN AHAMMED
JAHRA PATHIMA
Hearing History
Judge: 1097-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KRISHNARAJANAGAR
COMPROMISE
COMPROMISE
COMPROMISE
COMPROMISE
COMPROMISE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | COMPROMISE | |
| 14-01-2026 | COMPROMISE | |
| 08-12-2025 | COMPROMISE | |
| 01-12-2025 | COMPROMISE | |
| 27-11-2025 | COMPROMISE |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The court dismissed Defendant No. 15's application (IA No. 7) seeking rejection of the plaintiff's partition suit. The defendant argued the suit was barred by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act (since no cancellation of a relinquishment deed was sought) and by limitation (8 years had passed since the deed's execution). The court found no valid grounds for rejection, holding that limitation is a mixed question of law and facts requiring a complete trial, and that a partition suit need not seek declaratory relief regarding a relinquishment deed. The application was dismissed with costs of Rs. 500. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The court dismissed Defendant No. 15's application (IA No. 7) seeking rejection of the plaintiff's partition suit. The defendant argued the suit was barred by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act (since no cancellation of a relinquishment deed was sought) and by limitation (8 years had passed since the deed's execution). The court found no valid grounds for rejection, holding that limitation is a mixed question of law and facts requiring a complete trial, and that a partition suit need not seek declaratory relief regarding a relinquishment deed. The application was dismissed with costs of Rs. 500. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts