SHIVANNA vs ABJUL UNNISA Advocate - Ganesh. S — 24/2022
Case under Order 7 Rule 1 R/w Sec 26 of Cpc Section 1,. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAMS500000822022
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
24/2022
Filing Date
18-01-2022
Registration No
24/2022
Registration Date
19-01-2022
Court
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD
Judge
448-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SHIVANNA
Adv. SHIVAPRASANNA
Respondent(s)
ABJUL UNNISA Advocate - Ganesh. S
Hearing History
Judge: 448-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NANJANGUD
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 28-02-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 21-02-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 03-01-2026 | EVIDENCE | |
| 09-12-2025 | EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: OS 24/2022 | Date: 09.12.2025 | Court: Senior Civil Judge, Nanjangud The court examined a property purchase dispute involving a contested land transaction. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant executed a fraudulent sale deed despite receiving ₹1,20,000 as loan repayment, and later misappropriated loan documents to claim a purchase agreement. The court found the plaintiff's claims credible regarding the loan transaction but ruled that the alleged purchase agreement was not validly executed within the stipulated 6-month period. The matter remains under continued consideration for final adjudication on the validity of the property transfer and related claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: OS 24/2022 | Date: 09.12.2025 | Court: Senior Civil Judge, Nanjangud The court examined a property purchase dispute involving a contested land transaction. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant executed a fraudulent sale deed despite receiving ₹1,20,000 as loan repayment, and later misappropriated loan documents to claim a purchase agreement. The court found the plaintiff's claims credible regarding the loan transaction but ruled that the alleged purchase agreement was not validly executed within the stipulated 6-month period. The matter remains under continued consideration for final adjudication on the validity of the property transfer and related claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts