VASANTHAMMA vs THE TAHASHILDAR — 535/2025

Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section U/SEC.13(3),B,D,ACT.. Status: AMENDED PLAINT. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES

CNR: KAMS410029632025

AMENDED PLAINT

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

533/2025

Filing Date

06-12-2025

Registration No

535/2025

Registration Date

08-12-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KRISHNARAJANAGARA

Judge

1097-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KRISHNARAJANAGAR

Acts & Sections

REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS ACT Section U/SEC.13(3),B,D,ACT.

Petitioner(s)

VASANTHAMMA

Adv. S. PRASAD

NAGARATHANAMMA

PANKAJA H.K.

H.K. SHAMBHUDEV

SHANKAR DEV H.K.

Respondent(s)

THE TAHASHILDAR

Hearing History

Judge: 1097-I ADDL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KRISHNARAJANAGAR

07-03-2026

AMENDED PLAINT

28-02-2026

HEARING

25-02-2026

ORDER

19-02-2026

ORDER

03-02-2026

EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

19-02-2026
Exhibits
19-02-2026
Deposition

Summary: In Misc Case No. 20/2024, the court heard witness examination on 19.02.2026. The witness testified about the plaintiff's visual impairment and signature practices since 1988-89, and alleged that the first defendant misused the plaintiff's name to create false documents and notices in an attempt to illegally dispossess the plaintiff's property. The court adjourned the cross-examination of the witness as the defendant's counsel had not adequately cooperated, and directed cross-examination to proceed on the next date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In Misc Case No. 20/2024, the court heard witness examination on 19.02.2026. The witness testified about the plaintiff's visual impairment and signature practices since 1988-89, and alleged that the first defendant misused the plaintiff's name to create false documents and notices in an attempt to illegally dispossess the plaintiff's property. The court adjourned the cross-examination of the witness as the defendant's counsel had not adequately cooperated, and directed cross-examination to proceed on the next date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KRISHNARAJANAGARA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case